User talk:Sphilbrick/Archive 86

Robert Young (materials scientist)
Please note the license information in the reference and restore the article. Thank you. Rentier (talk) 20:03, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Huh? "Copyright © 2017 The Royal Society. All rights reserved. Terms, conditions and policies."-- S Philbrick (Talk)  20:05, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Followup. I haven't yet seen signs that the particular page is CC 4.0 rather than all rights resernved, but CC SA BY 4.0 is not compatibe with Wikipedia.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  20:09, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * See FAQ/Copyright-- S Philbrick (Talk)  20:15, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * https://royalsociety.org/about-us/terms-conditions-policies/ section "Intellectual property rights", which states "All text published under the heading 'Biography' on Fellow profile pages is available under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.". I have also put the attribution in the reference description. It's relased under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which is compatible per WP:COMPLIC.  Rentier (talk) 20:17, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You are correct, sorry. I see that it has been restored.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  21:14, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm still puzzled, because the source page very clearly states "All rights reserved." Technically, I don't think they can say that, and then claim it is CC BY 4.0. They should have said "Some rights reserved " but while I think I am right, it isn't worth pushing it. Maybe someone will contact them and get thme to fix it.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  21:26, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!
 Merry Christmas !!

Hi, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,

Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia! ,

– Davey 2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 13:56, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank-you, and to you as well!-- S Philbrick (Talk)  13:27, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings
...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:09, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I was in Canada yesterday although nowhere near where you are. Seasons greetings to you and yours as well-- S Philbrick (Talk)  13:28, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

 * Thanks, I know you've been very active but I didn't realize you'd hit the 200 K edits. Very impressive! (Take a few minutes off to enjoy Christmas but then back to work:)-- S Philbrick (Talk)  13:30, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas !!!

 * Thanks, we have a six day old grandson visiting, so it is a special Christmas. -- S Philbrick (Talk)  17:17, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Season's Greetings


Hello there! Shearonink (talk) wishes you & yours the the very best of the season! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Diwali, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Festivus (for the rest of us!) or even the Saturnalia,  here's to  hoping your holiday time is wonderful and that  the New Year will be an improvement upon the old. CHEERS!

Share these holiday wishes by adding  ~  to your friends' talk pages.

Shearonink (talk) 19:35, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! and Merry Christmas. -- S Philbrick (Talk)  12:33, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Sock block
Hi, since I notice that you are currently editing, would you mind blocking a self-confessed sock account per ? They probably will stick to their promise but better to be sure. Thanks, and best wishes for the season. - Sitush (talk) 12:27, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ (Merry Christmas, and don't say I never got you anything :) -- S Philbrick (Talk)  12:31, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Ha! Thanks very much. Enjoy the day with your new addition to the family. - Sitush (talk) 12:38, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Sir
I want Create Again Babak Rahnama Article, I Have Good References, Can You Help Me & Move This Article To My Practice Page? Thnak You Very Much Mohammadrajabloo (talk) 09:17, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ See User:Mohammadrajabloo/Babak_Rahnama-- S Philbrick (Talk)  12:45, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Deleted revision for Agnew Lake Mine
Hello, I note that you found a concern with similarities in my edit with another website. I also note that the site I used as a reference is identical to the blog site you mentioned, as is at least one other site I have now found. Can you please restore the deleted edit so I can further refine the info to fix the copyright issues as opposed to retyping it? Much appreciated. Turgan Talk 23:08, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Our internal rules do not generally permit the restoration of copyrighted material. I am not surprised that my source wasn't exactly the same as your - it is our experience that many other sites are not very respecful of copyrights. If you can show me that the site you used is properly licensed for use in Wikipedia, I may be able to do the restoration, but if not, the material should generally be written in your own words.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  23:13, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I just noticed you removed all my edits and sources, not just the one you were questioning. They were valid sources.  I am surprised you did not tag it and give me a chance address your concern before deleting everything.  This is not new to me, as I have been editing for 10+ years. I have had articles deleted by mistake in the past and they have been restored. Turgan Talk 23:18, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * , are you able to help with this, as you are familiar with the issues I had several years back with all of the Elliot Lake mine articles? Thanks, Turgan Talk 23:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I was edit conflicted. I was offering to see what I could do to retore some of your edits, but if you've decided to bring in others, I'll go back to copyright work.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  23:28, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm leaving for Canada shortly, so not likely to have much online time for a few days.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  23:46, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for restoring the edits up to the one in question. Much appreciated.  It looks like the information I referenced was copied verbatim to at least two other "blog sites", including the one you pointed me to.  Now looking them over I am not sure which, if any is "properly licenced". I note that the page I drew from and referenced is the only version of the info that actually has a copyright license/notice at the bottom of the page. As you seem to do a lot with copyright issues, can you clarify for me the policy of using forums/blogs as reliable references?  I was under the understanding that this was not encouraged. Turgan Talk 23:55, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Blogs are almost never allowed as a reference. Two exceptions, one of whch clearly doesn't apply here, a blog can be used as a reference for an article about that blog. There a broader exception for some blogs, " when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications". Don't know if that applies, but even if it does, that permits use as a reference, not copying the text.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  00:01, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I have been a little tied up with unpacking (just moved to Calgary) so things are a little hectic and I haven't been online in a while. I don't recall the issues with the Elliot Lake articles, if you need something still let me know. --kelapstick(bainuu) 15:45, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it has been resolved.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  16:32, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It appeared to be, I had a look and notwithstanding it not being a particularly reliable source, it was a little too copy/pastey as well. I have also gone ahead and expanded it some. Cheers, --kelapstick(bainuu) 16:51, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

New Year's resolution: Write more articles for Women in Red!
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

May Mann
Hello. I was wondering why all my edits on May Mann's page were removed? My edits are all from May Mann's unpublished autobiography ( she wasn't able to finish it as she passed away) since I am one of the very few people who have a copy of the manuscript I thought it would be good to enable others to see and understand who May Mann was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uncoveringcelebrityhistory (talk • contribs) 17:44, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * While the source may have been an unpublished autobiography, it is still subject to copyright, and unless it was licensed in a way compatible with Wikipedia, which didn't appear to be the case, it cannot be used without an explicit license.


 * Unfortunately, an unpublished autobiography is almost certainly not to qualify as a reliable source. If an article about this person can be written from published reliable sources it might be appropriate to include an anecdote from an unpublished autobiography but it almost certainly cannot be used as the main source material. I won't be surprised if some editors would even disagree with my first suggestion that it could be used to support the inclusion of some material.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  20:57, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello. I'm sorry. I would have thought an autobiography written by May Mann would have been reliable as it gives us a very rare insight into her life. Right now there are not many articles that can include this information as she never was able to publish it. It would be an uncopyrighted work. I didn't use just the autobiography. I found several newspaper clippings that also corroborated the information I included from her autobiography. Are you able to send me a copy of what I had written so I am able to change it using the information I found via the newspapers? I really dont want to go through the whole hassle of redoing the whole Wikipedia page. Please let me know if you are able to send me a copy of what I had originally written. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uncoveringcelebrityhistory (talk • contribs) 02:57, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No, an unpublished autobiography does not qualify as a reliable source. We normally do not provide copies of deleted material when there are copyright issues, but I think this one deserves an exception. Please go to your preferences and turn on the email option (near the bottom of the first tab). Let me know when you've done so and I will email you a copy of the page.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  16:06, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello. Yes I have done it. Thank you. I have to ask can I use her unpublished autobiography at all as a reference? I have multiple newspaper clippings that I can gather similar information from. But some info comes directly from her biography. Let me know Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uncoveringcelebrityhistory (talk • contribs) 18:27, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Please see Identifying_reliable_sources. Sources must be published.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  20:32, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Muboshgu
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Anetode • Laser brain • Worm That Turned
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg None

Bureaucrat changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news
 * A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news
 * The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey results have been posted. The Community Tech team will investigate and address the top ten results.
 * The Anti-Harassment Tools team is inviting comments on new blocking tools and improvements to existing blocking tools for development in early 2018. Feedback can be left on the discussion page or by email.

Arbitration
 * Following the results of the 2017 election, the following editors have been (re)appointed to the Arbitration Committee:, , , , , , ,.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Question for ya
Hey, Sphilbrick. Hope all is well. I was wondering if you would take a look at Edward H. Hammond, Andy Tompkins, and Tisa Mason articles I have recently created. They are definitely in my own wording, but the tool is still picking up phrases – particularly their job titles or education. I'm not sure how to reword these, so I was hoping you could take a look. Thanks, Corky  23:17, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll try to look at it tomorrow. Ping me if I forget.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  01:55, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Corky, thanks for bringing this to my attention. I appreciate your contributions and I appreciate that you are double check with our copyright tools to make sure your contributions are in compliance. I ran each of the articles through the tool and while the tool identifies phrases such as:


 * president of Fort Hays State University
 * of the Kansas Board of Regents
 * President of Valley City State University

None of these phrases rise to the level that I think it would be necessary to attempt to reword. Any reasonable person writing an article about these three people is likely to include phrases such as this and I don't think rise to the level of concern. I think it makes sense for the tool to identify them as some six word phrases might be a sign that rewording might be necessary, but I don't think that's the case here.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  18:08, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Perfect, I appreciate you taking a look! I figured I would ask, just to be on the safe side! Corky  18:45, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

User:Wikipedia Information Team
Due to phab:T182541/phab:T178842, any contact role accounts need to have an edit or logged action for Special:EmailUser to function for those that are not Bureaucrats, Stewards, Global renamers, or WMF Support and Safety. Making a dummy edit will re-enable emails from all users. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 18:05, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Mail
––Ammarpad (talk) 09:08, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Reverted CPAWS edits
Hi Sphilbrick, the edits I made to the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society was content derived from their website but I work at this organization as the National Comms Manager and they're tasked me with updating their entry. We had previously tried to do this through the initial user account User:Cpaws they used to set up the page but it was blocked because it didn't meet the user guidelines. Is there a way that I can continue to make these additions without running into revert actions again? All updates would be completed today. Thanks, - Jscott482 (talk) 15:12, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I have given some advice to this user at her talk page. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:43, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello Dear Sphilbrick ❤❤❤❤
I Fixed Babak Rahnama (Iranian Singer) Article In My Sandbox Please Check & Help Me To Share On Wikipedia. With respect Mohammadrajabloo (talk) 21:12, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, that isn't my strength. -- S Philbrick (Talk)  21:26, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * FYI, Mohammadrajabloo is a sock of . —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 17:09, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry
Hi Sphilbrick, I just want to thank you for helping out with her content creations. She is an outstanding contributor, particular for Women in Red, but the way she communicate with other editors sometimes when they are simply trying to point out potential mistakes, is downright questionable, and I'd like to apologize. This is an editor that I've been following since August last year, and I try to look after her edits as much as I can. So if you find anymore mistakes (such as using another wiki as reference), please feel free to let me know instead and I will correct them. Thank you for your time, Alex Shih (talk) 17:41, 6 January 2018 (UTC) I'm equally puzzled. As I mentioned in my note to her which was curiously removed, I have seen her name show up as a contributor on many occasions. I'm also a contributor to WIR although far less prolific than she is. I just now looked at her list of contributions and it is mind-bogglingly (probably not a word, but should be) large.

Unfortunately, I'm also active in copy patrol, an initiative which identifies potential copyright issues and her name has popped up a few times today. I've tried to politely explain the issues and I even fixed one of them for her — I'm not quite sure whether she views me as being helpful and her lack of communication doesn't help.

Rather than fix the most recent problem I identified, I simply pointed out to her and hope she will fix it. (I was going to point it out to you, but I see you are on it.) Some people are happy if another editor fixes their problems while other editors would prefer that they be pointed out so they can fix them themselves. I'm happy to do either option but without any feedback, I don't know what she prefers.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  18:03, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've replaced the references for the time being, and I will try to look for other sources too. Based on experience alone, whenever other editors point out something, she usually tries to just fix them without answering on talk pages (and she tend to only leave messages she likes on her talk page). With such mind-boggling number of contributions, she has ran into close paraphrasing issues quite a few times in DYK (in which she quitted), and I've been trying to copyedit after these articles. I would be more than happy to clean up any potential copyright issues in her articles myself, if it's okay with you, please direct them to me. Thank you! On a personal note, I've been trying to learn my ropes with new oversight responsibility, so if I can ask for your guidance sometimes, I would appreciate that too. Best wishes, Alex Shih (talk) 18:18, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

1902 Florida State Football Team
Why did you delete my edits? All information is accurate, NPOV and cited?Norris.michaelj (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:34, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * As noted in the edit summary, you simply copied from this. With some rare exceptions, such as properly licensed sources or short excerpts clearly marked as quotations, your contribution should be written in your own words.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  21:40, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Did you actually look at the work you deleted? You deleted an entire page worth of work over information that you identified was only in one particular game summary. Do you not think it would have been more helpful to discuss in the talk page? Maybe worked with me on this? Is this how you encourage people to participate? That is a days worth of research down the tubes because you have issue with one small portion of the article. It would be nice if you would restore everything but that portion. Norris.michaelj (talk) 21:44, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * , with the exception of the lead (which I have restored) the entirety of what you added was copied from the source mentioned by Sphilbrick. It needs to be rewritten in your own words. Primefac (talk) 21:48, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I am very troubled by your response. Many new editors start with copyrighted material and make light edits to it, thinking this is sufficient, failing to understand that closely paraphrased material is still a copyright violation but that's not remotely the case here.. Almost everything you added was a straight copy paste from a newspaper article. I don't quite understand how it can take a day of research to copy and paste some material but that's beside the point. I urge you to look at Copyrights. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  21:55, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Again, I am not trying to violate any copyright. I am more than willing to rewrite anything that is in violation. It was more that the whole thing was deleted, with no message, no edit, no warning, just erasure..Norris.michaelj (talk) 21:58, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * "Trying" is irrelevant. You did violate copyright and that's not acceptable. I realize you are relatively new here, but you been an editor for five years. Surely you are familiar with the concept of edit summaries by now. In not, see Help:Edit summary Copyright violations are immediately reverted whenever they are found. For editors not familiar with copyright issues, there is a process to report potential violations so that experienced editors can review them but for editors such as myself, who have worked on literally thousands of copyright issues, it is standard practice to revert the edit and explain it in an edit summary. Which I did. It isn't standard practice to warn someone that a copyright violation might be reverted if you don't take care of it it is standard practice to revert it immediately. What on earth did you expect to happen?-- S Philbrick (Talk)  22:12, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Understood. It wont happen again. Looking at microfishe to do research on hundred year old college football is making me cranky. Thanks for the information.Norris.michaelj (talk) 22:20, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
 * On a more positive note, I'm very appreciative of editors who are willing to work on such articles. While I agree with the importance of articles on well known subjects such as Aristotle, let's face it, if that article disappeared, while a lot of people would miss it, there are many thousands of alternative places where you can read something about him. In contrast, while there are far fewer people who might be interested in the 1902 Florida State football team, if that's what you are interested in reading about, there are not a lot of options and I think it's great that Wikipedia has decent coverage of such subjects.

I spent some time at research libraries when I was working on Senda Berenson Abbott. Thankfully I did not have to look at microfiche, but I'm familiar with the challenges of doing research on that happened over a century ago.

Please note that if you are looking at microfiche from that time period it almost certainly qualifies as public domain. Per copyright, if it was written before 1923 (in the US) it is in the public domain and while it still needs to be cited properly it can be used without fear of copyright infringement. I think it adds a lot to an article to find contemporaneous discussion and that's one of the positive attributes of working on a subject in that time period — at least the contemporaneous publications are in the public domain.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  22:42, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

National Boxing Association
Well strike me dead, I need to take more care to run things through the copyvio detector. Thanks for cleaning up. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:55, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Get access to my user page user:ylianst
Hi. My user page user:ylianst was deleted in in 2016. I would really like to get it back & fix it up. Can you put the page back in my draft area? - Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ylian (talk • contribs) 03:24, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I looked for User:Ylianst and got the message - User account "Ylianst" is not registered. I see that I deleted user:Ylian, is that the one you want?-- S Philbrick (Talk)  04:07, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I sent you a copy of the contents via email.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  04:09, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello Sir
I Want Create Iranian Singer Babak Rahnama's Article But I Cant Because I Am New User Can You Move This Article Info To My Sandbox Page Please? PLEASE Answer Me To My Talk Page Or Here LoveandPeace1 (talk) 09:16, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * As already answered the same question in my user talk page, the article has been locked by administrative action. If you want to request it be unlocked for creation make your case at ANI. -- Alexf(talk) 13:35, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I haven't followed the complete sequence of events, but you should follow Alexf's advice. S Philbrick (Talk)  14:18, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

minor civility concerns
Might you kindly read the RfC at Talk:Carolina Nairne as I fear that civility might be a problem there, either on my part or the part of another. Merci. Collect (talk) 23:37, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Graciousness appears to elude the editor - as he doubled down on his attack on me. Argh! Collect (talk) 15:18, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Sent you an email
Not super urgent. ~ Amory ( u  •  t  •  c ) 16:24, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

When you get time...
I would appreciate any constructive criticism you may have on this. G M G talk   23:59, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Looking now.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  13:37, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Responded.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  13:56, 28 January 2018 (UTC)