User talk:Talskiddy/Archive 1

Enjoy your break
Hi Talskiddy, This is just a very brief note to let you know I'm back in the fold after my own (longish) break from WP. I hope to get stuck into more editing on Cornwall-related articles very soon. Enjoy your break and do say 'hi' when you get back. All the best Andy F (talk) 16:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back
Hi Talskiddy, I noticed your article on Joan Rendell - welcome back. If you get a few minutes, you might care to comment at WP:Cornwall on this issue: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cornwall

Best wishes, Andy F (talk) 20:47, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 18:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Nathaniel Rich (soldier)
We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Nathaniel Rich (soldier), but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from ODNB, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Nathaniel Rich (soldier) and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Nathaniel Rich (soldier), in your email. See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Nathaniel Rich (soldier) with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Nathaniel Rich (soldier). See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:Nathaniel Rich (soldier) saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:26, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I have placed such a notice on this page before, and concerning direct copying from the same source. I find it hard to understand why you have simply waited for further copyright violations to come to light. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:26, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm surprised it took you so long to find this one.I bet you get a kick out of it.


 * That's the best you can do, is it? Please have a look at Copyright violations. I actually have better things to do than going through the procedures. You have been unhelpful in the past, which doesn't look too good. Charles Matthews (talk) 20:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * you will see that you have edited the page yourself here

Actually I think your understanding of copyright violations and why they matter here is very poor, and such that you can't be expected to carry out the duties outlined at Reviewing. Those include checking for additions of copyright material. So I think you shouldn't have the reviewer right. But that's not my decision. It would be up to the community or the ArbCom. Charles Matthews (talk) 20:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * You come across a Headmaster berating a small schoolchild which is perhaps I have not been so helpful to you. I have never come across anyone with an approach such as yourself anywhere on Wikipedia. The article you are refering to was something I added in 2007 and have since forgotten all about. It has also been edited and added to by many others (including yourself). I originally misunderstood the copyright status of the ODNB. Assume good faith.


 * The article Joseph Jane also seems to be a copyright problem and has been blanked for revision or deletion, if we cannot verify that the content derives from a PD version of the DNB. If as you indicate you misunderstood the copyright status of the ODNB, then those articles will need to be evaluated to ensure that you did not inadvertently violate the copyright policy. Can you please list any other articles you may have copied from that source to facilitate this examination? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:30, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Requested assistance with copyright cleanup
I appreciate your willingness to rewrite this content when it is identified, but your help in identifying the content would be very valuable. Glancing at your contribution list this morning, I found another article: William Coryton. It is currently blanked, as it bears no resemblance to the public domain version of the DNB and seems a straightforward copy of that written by L.J. Reeve of Cambridge.

I am presuming that this matter is limited to ODNB problems, and I would greatly prefer not to have to request a Contributor Copyright Investigation (CCI) of your account. In a CCI, all of a contributor's major contributions are listed to be checked for copyright problems. That would be a huge waste of resources as we have dozens of CCIs that represent far more widespread concerns, and it could also result in the loss of some content that is not a problem, as content that cannot be verified to be clear of copyright concerns (for instance if the source is inaccessible) is generally presumptively removed. There's no way to limit a CCI to content imported from the Dictionary of National Biography.

It seems it would be far simpler for you to look at the articles you have created and create a list of those which were copied from the DNB or ODNB, and I presume that if your violation of the ODNB's copyright was inadvertent (I have no reason to doubt that it was) you would be willing to help clean up the problem you have created. We can't retain this content. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:31, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Sidney Godolphin (poet), Francis Bassett, Thomas Tonkin are also just copied from the ODNB. John King (Rector of Chelsea) takes something from the public domain DNB text, and I can't see on first sight whether it is copyvio of the revised ODNB version (perhaps not). Hugh Boscawen, 1st Viscount Falmouth takes from the public domain DNB text. The style in Richard Butler, 3rd Viscount Mountgarret suggests it may be taken from somewhere, but apparently not ODNB or DNB. Charles Matthews (talk) 13:08, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Charles. I've blanked the first three. Richard Butler, 3rd Viscount Mountgarret was originally taken from the DNB, though it seems to have been almost completely overwritten. Do you have reason to believe looking at the contribution list that these are the only remaining articles of concern, or would it still be valuable for Talskiddy to help identify any additional issues? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:38, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Can't say. That list isn't chronological, and I can't go all through it right now. Certainly Talskiddy could help out here. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:29, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. So my request stands. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:38, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I have checked and I am unable identify any outstanding ODNB articles that I inadvertently used 3 years ago. Talskiddy (talk) 22:12, 1 August 2010 (UTC)