User talk:Wiki15071

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Wiki15071, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to George Poede have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues here.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Copyrights. You may also want to review Copy-paste.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Translation. See also Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:51, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

January 2018
Your addition to Roger Scully has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:50, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ioan Horga, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bihor ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Ioan_Horga check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Ioan_Horga?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 29
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited José Luis Meilán Gil, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Galicia ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Jos%C3%A9_Luis_Meil%C3%A1n_Gil check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Jos%C3%A9_Luis_Meil%C3%A1n_Gil?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kenneth Shepsle


A tag has been placed on Kenneth Shepsle requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://scholar.harvard.edu/kshepsle/biocv. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. S Philbrick (Talk)  23:50, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without evidence of permission. Please take this opportunity to ensure that you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:52, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * You were warned about WP:copyright violation on 10 October 2017 and again on 7 January 2018. At Kenneth Shepsle you contested deletion on the talk-page and then made seventeen further edits to the article without removing the content you had copy-pasted from here. With to Simon Hix you added material copied directly from the New York Times. To be allowed to return to editing you will need to demonstrate that you clearly understand what was wrong with those various edits, and preferably also identify, here on this page, each and every edit in which you have copied any text from non-free external sources. I hope that this can be quickly resolved and that you can return to edit productively. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:06, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

I agree my previous message was not really an unblock request. It is just an apology to the Wikipedia community if what I did was harmful for the Wikipedia, and I accept the administrators' decision that has now been confirmed. Reading the questions above I also realise my knowledge of the Wikipedia rules is rather limited, while I understand the importance of these rules for the survival of the Wikipedia. I would by not means want that my sloppy editing style put in danger the future of the Wikipedia by making it vulnerable to copyright demands. My infringements were reiterated as the talk on this page shows, so the block seems fully warranted in order to avoid further damage to the Wikipedia. I am thankful to the administrators for having put an end to this before the damage was more serious or too late to repair, and I am sorry for any inconvenience caused.

Unblock discussion
Hello,. What say ye? Yea or nay?-- Dloh cier ekim  (talk) 11:32, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * , I'm very new at this, so if you or anyone else thinks that the above shows a clear enough understanding of the problem to unblock, do please go ahead and do so. What I personally would like to see – as I said above – is a commitment to review past edits for possible problems (of which I hope there are none). Wiki15071, could you agree to this: you list your last five article creations here, and identify any possible copyright problems in them (if none, just say so; if stuff was copied, say where from). If your assessment seems correct I'll unblock you with a condition that you will also review your other past edits. Does that seem fair? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:53, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello,. Thanks for the prompt response. In everything I have done so far I have tried to respect Wikipedia rules. In my particular case, I have paid a lot of attention to basing everything I write on reliable external sources, and have always cited them, because I thought the greatest risk was to write original ideas, which I understood was contrary to Wikipedia rules. In my articles, you can usually see a lot of references, in such a way that nothing is unsourced and a basic article can start with five different sources and end up with more than a dozen as it grows. In the process of drafting an article, because I am scrupulous in basing everything on external sources, I recognise I may have incidentally copy-pasted sentences to my draft, which then I have reformulated to integrate them into the text, linking them to the rest of the text. When an article has many different sources, putting all that externally-sourced information together requires reformulating it in such ways that the final text of the article passes the test of fair use. If in any of my articles I have committed any copyright violation, it has been unintended and I am unaware of. I also follow somehow many articles I have edited in the past and always try to add any corrections or introduce improvements when I have the chance. This includes further improving the style on occasion. Needless to say, if I detected any potential copyright problem, I would correct immediately. I thank the administrators that, having access to specialised software and databases, have brought occasional breaches to my attention. The case you reported was a clear violation, even if temporary or unintended. I have to learn more about the Wikipedia, and this incident has taught me how the talk pages work, how to write e-mail to administrators, or how to ping users in discussions. From now on, I will try to be more careful with copyright issues, especially when starting new articles. I thank you and for your time and patience, and hope I will have the opportunity to prove that I can be a valuable contributor to the Wikipedia in the future.
 * , perhaps I wasn't completely clear before. What I am suggesting is that you look at the last five articles you created (not counting Kenneth Shepsle, so specifically Carlos Prado Pampín, Paul Dobrescu, Fabio Franchino, José Luis Meilán Gil and Ghenadie Valuța), and note here whether there is any copyright problem with any one of them, and if so, what it is. After you do so, I'll look at them myself, and if I agree with your assessment of those five, I'll lift the block. If you have questions, please ask here. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:38, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Dear I have gone through each of them now and I am not able to find any copyright violation. In Fabio Franchino I would add this reference to the EUSA prize for his book: https://www.eustudies.org/about/eusa-prizes/prize-winners.

Dear  I there anything wrong with my unblock request? Sorry if I am being impatient, but I am not familiar with these procedures.

Unblock discussion
Dear : Have you had time to review my unblock request?

Dear : Will you please take the time to review my unblock request as a Christmas present?

You haven't been waiting months for your unblock request to be considered; until today, you did not have an open unblock request. --Yamla (talk) 17:18, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the message and please accept my apologies if something I said is technically inaccurate. This situation has really overwhelmed me because when it first happened to me, I was completely inexperienced with these procedures, and I still am. If you review the discussion above, you will notice that there was never any bad faith, and that I tried to fulfill all the requests from administrators everytime I was asked to. The last time I did not receive a reply from the administrators asking for changes, but I see now that a different administrator automatically cancelled the request because the ban had not been lifted after a given period of time. I just saw this now because everytime I logged in to see the state of my unblock request, my whole family got blocked from the Wikipedia for several days (IP block). If you could please review my last answer and tell me what can be improved, I will be happy to try my best. It has been a long time since this all started. Please help.

I need a lawyer! Is there any such thing n the wikipedia community? Some fellow user with konowledge of the rules and procedures who can act as a mediator, advisor or advocate on your behalf?