User talk:DanCherek/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Copyright help

Hello DanCherek,

I am new here. So I am not understand exactly the things. So the issue was that I copied an easy text from here? Or should I ask permission from this author? Or should I mark this website in the source?

https://hunghist.org/index.php/component/content/article/83-articles/164-2013-2-zsoldos

this text:

King Béla IV of Hungary, after successfully completing his mission to conclude a mutual marriage agreement sealing the alliance between the houses of Anjou and Árpád, Abbot of Monte Cassino Bernhard Ayglerius reported enthusiastically to his lord, King Charles I of Naples in 1269:

"The Hungarian royal house has incredible power, its military forces are so large that nobody in the East and the North dares even budge if the triumphant and glorious king mobilizes his army. Most of the countries and princes of the North and East belong to his empire by kinship or conquest."

If I write this in my own word it will be all right? But there is only a some word, it is hard to use different words.

But the quote came from a 800 years old Latin document, I think this is not copyrighted and I marked the source:

"Domus Hungarie incredibilem habet potenciam, indicibilem quidem armatorum gentem, ita quod in partibus Orientis et Aquilonis nullus sit pedem ausus movere, ubi triumphator, rex scilicet gloriosus, potentem exercitum suum movit." Gusztáv Wenzel (Pest, 1860–1874). Árpádkori Új Okmánytár (Charters from the Árpád Age, New Series), Codex diplomaticus Arpadianus continuatus, 12 volumens. Volumen VIII. page 316. https://library.hungaricana.hu/hu/view/KozMagyOkmanytarak_ArpadkoriOkmanytar_08/?pg=339&layout=s

Could you give me advise what should I do?

Thanks, OrionNimrod — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orionnimrod (talk • contribs) 10:22, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Orionnimrod. The quote is fine, because it was presented as a quote. The issue was the sentence preceding the quote about the mutual marriage agreement, which was copied directly from that source. Please feel free to re-add it after writing it in your own words. I sometimes find it helpful to read the source material, then try to summarize it without directly referring to it (of course you can look at it afterwards, but this might help avoid the temptation of using the same or substantially similar phrasing). Hope that makes sense — let me know if you have any questions. Happy editing! DanCherek (talk) 10:29, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for letting me know.!!! I will never make an article on Wikipedia again! Very very thanks! ➤ Tajwar – thesupermaN! ^{【Click to Discuss】} 10:40, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

@Tajwar.thesuperman: You are certainly allowed to continue to create articles, and I appreciate the work that you've done to date. Just please be sure to write in your own words and don't copy or machine-translate text from other websites — you can read through the links that I posted on your talk page to learn more about Wikipedia's copyright policy. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 10:43, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

@DanCherek,
I haven't made many articles so far. So I don't know so much. Will these two articles be removed?
Thanks ➤ Tajwar – thesupermaN! ^{【Click to Discuss】} 10:48, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

If your article has been nominated for deletion and you think that the subject is notable and should be kept, you should comment in the discussion (e.g., at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aristopharma Ltd.), but be sure to explain clearly why you believe it is notable. Typically after a week has passed, an administrator will review the discussion and determine whether there is a consensus to delete the article. DanCherek (talk) 10:51, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Question from MiddlebridgeScimitar (11:10, 26 August 2021)

Hi, I am looking into setting up a Wikipedia Page for Middlebridge Scimitar aside from Reliant Scimitars. How is this possible? --MiddlebridgeScimitar (talk) 11:10, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi MiddlebridgeScimitar, welcome to Wikipedia! I'm not sure if you are affiliated with the company "Middlebridge Scimitar Ltd" — if you are, please see the conflict of interest guideline for more information, including how to provide some required disclosures. You can read WP:YFA for a detailed guide on how to create your first article. It will take you through the steps to create a draft that can be submitted for review. Important things to keep in mind are that the article's topic should be notable. This generally means that it has already been covered in detail in good references from independent sources. Make sure to summarize information in your own words, rather than copying content from other websites. Writing an article from scratch can be tough for new editors, so if you are finding it challenging, I would encourage you to edit existing articles for a while to get the hang of things. Let me know if you have additional questions or need more detailed guidance! DanCherek (talk) 11:23, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

September 2021 at Women in Red

Women in Red | September 2021, Volume 7, Issue 9, Numbers 184, 188, 204, 205, 207, 208 Online events: New: Women writers & their works Contest (Jul/Aug/Sep): Latin America contest Continuing: Women's leadership & empowerment | Olympic & Paralympic Games Women's rights | #1day1woman See also: Interwiki Women Collaboration Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage. Learn more about our proposed one-day online recruitment initiative in October. Help plan and coordinate future events. Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Follow Women in Red on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:29, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Copyright Violation

Hi DanCherek,

Lulu Mall, Thiruvananthapuram contain copyright violation from https://www.lulumall.in/thiruvananthapuram. Pachu Kannan (talk) 06:39, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the message! Let me take a look... DanCherek (talk) 06:42, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pachu Kannan: Fixed, I think. I partially restored some material from before the copyright violation was added, but I'm not very familiar with the article topic, so please take a look and feel free to make any further modifications that I may have missed. Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 06:57, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Anders

I did what you rightly pointed out to me, in the page Władysław Anders.--Giorgio Eusebio Petetti (talk) 13:17, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Giorgio Eusebio Petetti: Hi! Thanks for that. For future reference, attribution for copying within Wikipedia should be provided not in the article text itself, but rather in the edit summary. When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

When you copy text from another article, you should write copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution in that field, kind of like how I've done it here. Does that make sense? DanCherek (talk) 13:23, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks!--Giorgio Eusebio Petetti (talk) 13:28, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Curious

I find it interesting that you linked to WP:R in your edit summary, when the main guidance on that page is WP:NOTBROKEN which says not to replace redirects simply because they exist. Genuinely curious to which part of the page you're intending on referring. Primefac (talk) 11:28, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Primefac, I was referring to this: In other namespaces, particularly the template and portal namespaces in which subpages are common, any link or transclusion to a former page title that has become a redirect following a page move or merge should be updated to the new title for naming consistency. I read the "Reasons not to bypass redirects" section closely beforehand and all of those points seemed to be talking about either articles or specific sections of pages, so I thought standardizing a couple appearances of this particular page title across project space (admittedly a very minor change) would be fine. Let me know if that's not the case; either way I have no plans to do anything else like that. DanCherek (talk) 12:11, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

No worries, as I said I was mostly curious as to your reasoning, mainly if there was a specific section of the page you were using (since a section link can be more illuminating than just linking to the main page). Thanks! Primefac (talk) 13:38, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Jackie Wills

Thank you for your feedback. I am new to this so I mistakingly thought my work was just a working draft for me, to cut and paste from, and amend as I work. I will certainly change the text. I do not want to infringe any copyright. LOCALISERS (talk) 17:40, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi LOCALISERS, no worries! I figured that might have been the case. FYI, any time you hit the "Publish changes" button, you are releasing your changes under a Creative Commons license, even in draftspace or other namespaces. Many thanks for your work on the draft, and good luck with the editing. DanCherek (talk) 18:29, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Question from Babs Production Ltd (11:53, 31 August 2021)

Hi,

My company wants to create a Wikipedia page for themselves. How would we go about doing this?

Thanks, --Babs Production Ltd (talk) 11:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Babs Production Ltd, please see your talk-page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:08, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Admin someday?

Hey, hope you're doing well - have you ever considered running for adminship? ~TNT (she/they • talk) 13:46, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi TNT! Thanks for the message, I appreciate it. Yes, maybe someday in the future, but I'd like to get some more experience in the area where I think I'd be most helpful (copyright). I hope you won't mind continuing to tend to my RD1 requests in the meantime DanCherek (talk) 13:51, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

A bit more experience never hurt anyone (besides, "it'll cut down the workload" is always a great platform to run on....) ~TNT (she/they • talk) 13:53, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

August harvest

August songs

Thank for good DYK reviewing in August! I liked yesterday's Main page, with 4 bolded names I brought there, all in memory: the TFA, nominated for a missed user, the pictured DYK (Alfred Biolek), and two under Recent deaths, Siegfried Matthus and Teresa Żylis-Gara. August harvest. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Gerda! Happy end-of-August / beginning-of-September and well done on yesterday's main page — and I see you recently brought Alfred Biolek to RD as well. I have no idea how you do so much, but thanks for all you do! I've been taking a small break from writing recently, but starting to get back into it with Chaconne in G minor, where the format of the infobox image was inspired by your FA, BWV 1. A few connections to Dresden and various German composers! DanCherek (talk) 22:31, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

How should I not break copyright rules?

Hello. Recently an edit I made broke the Wikipedia copyright rules. I wish to use the information of that reference in that article, is it possible that if I were to paraphrase the source, would that abide by the copyright rules or should i avoid using said source? TheAnarchist 00 (talk) 07:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi TheAnarchist 00 — you should summarize information from reliable sources in your own words. In addition to not copying and pasting from the source, please be careful to avoid close paraphrasing, which is what we see when some people copy from a source and simply replace some of the words with their synonyms, which is still a breach of copyright because the overall sentence structure is retained. When writing articles, I sometimes find it helpful to read the source material, then try to summarize it without directly referring to it (of course you can look at it afterwards, but this might help avoid the temptation of using the same or substantially similar phrasing).

However, there is a second issue, which is that the navi.gg website is a primary source for the article about Natus Vincere. Wikipedia is primarily interested in what reliable, independent, secondary sources have to say about a particular subject, not what it says about itself. Primary sources can be acceptable for some basic uncontroversial facts, but ideally information should come from independent coverage rather than the organization's own website. I hope this all makes sense; let me know if you have any questions. DanCherek (talk) 11:37, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello DanCherek - Thank you for the information. I will write and edit the paragraph in a proper way, so as to not directly copy the source. As for the fact that it is a primary source, since it is about the organization's formation, i suspect that there may be no issue. If it is found to be too problematic, i will search for a better secondary source. Thank you for helping me. TheAnarchist 00 (talk) 12:52, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Good luck with the article. DanCherek (talk) 12:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Question from BookFollower (18:51, 1 September 2021)

Hi, there. After I registered for my account and became a Wikipedia user I have noticed that the Talk and Sandbox links at the top of the page appear red instead of blue. Could you tell me how to make it appear blue. --BookFollower (talk). 18:51, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi BookFollower, welcome to Wikipedia! A red link means that the page does not exist yet. To create it, click on the red link (for example, click on "Sandbox") and then you should see something like "Start the User:BookFollower/sandbox page." Click that, type something in the edit window to try it out, and then click "Publish page" to save it.

I hope that makes sense, let me know if you have any questions! I'm also going to post a message on your talk page at User talk:BookFollower with some additional links that you may find useful as you get started. DanCherek (talk) 18:57, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Impractical Jokers: The Movie

Copy Vio? What was that about? I quoted seven words, not even a full sentence, less than is normally be quoted from a review. -- 109.79.165.170 (talk) 19:03, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP. The quote was not the issue, and it is still in the article (at the end of the "Critical response" section). However, you pasted—inadvertently, I'm guessing—a whole paragraph verbatim from the Hollywood Reporter source as well, and that's what I removed. It's been redacted from the page history but you can see your addition if you click this link and then click "iThenticate report". The paragraph I removed is the one highlighted in red. DanCherek (talk) 19:07, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

That makes more sense. My bad, fat fingers and was trying to draft something better before I went with the short quote. I don't normally edit on mobile and made a mess, sorry. -- 109.79.165.170 (talk) 19:45, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

No worries It looks like you're doing great work on a lot of film articles and I appreciate that. Happy editing! DanCherek (talk) 19:59, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Question from Gio360 (02:23, 3 September 2021)

Where can i see the rules and guidelines? --Gio360 (talk) 02:23, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Gio360! Welcome to Wikipedia. There are a lot of policies and guidelines that have been developed over the years and it may be overwhelming if you try to read them all at once. A good place to start is WP:PILLARS which lists five fundamental principles of Wikipedia. Basically, feel free to edit any article you are interested in, but just make sure that what you write is written neutrally, written in your own words, and supported by reliable sources. I'm also going to post a message on your talk page with some additional links that you may find useful as you get started. My talk page is always open if you have additional questions — don't hesitate to reach out! DanCherek (talk) 02:33, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

We dont hear it enough

A genuine thank you for your contributions and for watching over articles concerning copyright material. You are amazing and I mean that with all that I am! --ARoseWolf 21:11, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf: Thank you, I appreciate it! Thanks for all you do as well — I regularly see you around the Teahouse, etc., with kind messages for newcomers and experienced editors alike. DanCherek (talk) 21:13, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations from WikiProject Articles for Creation!

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar & The Teamwork Barnstar
	Congratulations! You have earned The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar and The Teamwork Barnstar for reviewing 67 drafts and doing 41 re-reviews during the WikiProject Articles for creation July 2021 Backlog Drive. Thank you for your work to improve Wikipedia! On behalf of WikiProject Articles for Creation, Enterprisey (talk!) 00:18, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Beautiful Crime

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article A Beautiful Crime you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Whiteguru -- Whiteguru (talk) 03:21, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Beautiful Crime

The article A Beautiful Crime you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:A Beautiful Crime for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Whiteguru -- Whiteguru (talk) 07:41, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Riesz–Fischer Theorem Resource

Hi, on WikiProject Resource Exchange you've said that you have this document. I'm not sure how this works. Can you send it to (email) jcubic (talk) 16:52, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

@Jcubic: Sent via email. Since that's done, I've removed your email address above for privacy reasons. If you provided an email in your preferences, you can email most other users by going to Special:EmailUser/DanCherek (for instance) or by clicking "Email this user" on the sidebar when you're on their user page. Note that this will disclose your username and email address to the recipient. Hope that helps! DanCherek (talk) 17:04, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of A Beautiful Crime

The article A Beautiful Crime you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:A Beautiful Crime for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Whiteguru -- Whiteguru (talk) 01:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

CBC News

Dan

Thanks for letting me know about the need to attribute content copies from one page to another. My apologies as I've only recently joined and I am still learning the way of things. Do I need to edit my edit summary to include an the attribution you suggested? If so, how do I go back and do so?

Appreciate you taking the time to educate.

Balancingakt (talk) 04:13, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Balancingakt! Welcome to Wikipedia. In this case I've provided the attribution for you (here) so my message on your talk page was just a friendly note for future edits. You don't need to do anything specific for the CBC News edit at this time. Hope that helps! DanCherek (talk) 04:15, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Chaconne in G minor

Bravo–Your work on Chaconne in G minor is first class! It is truly a lovely piece; Heifetz's recording for interested me in it. Do you have any future plans with it, GAN maybe? If you decide to go that route, I would be happy to review it there. Best - Aza24 (talk) 07:54, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

@Aza24: Thank you so much! I love that piece and figure that as long as it's too hard for me to play, I can still write about it It's my first foray into classical music articles but more to come, hopefully. Thanks for the suggestion — I've put it up for GAN now. If you decide to pick it up, I'd look forward to improving the article with any suggestions that you have. DanCherek (talk) 11:08, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Glad to see you're considering getting into more CM articles—there's always plenty to do...! I've just picked it up now, and should leave some comments soon. Best – Aza24 (talk) 08:20, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chaconne in G minor

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Chaconne in G minor you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aza24 -- Aza24 (talk) 08:22, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

How to indicate copying from open access sources

Hi, based on your comment here, I am hoping you can help me with this question: This article on education for sustainable development has a long section of open access publications from which content was apparently copied (see under "Sources"). I find that not very useful, as one doesn't know what was copied from where exactly. I found that a paragraph in the lead was copied from here but for the others I think this might refer to some previous versions of the article? The article is really short so I have my doubts that much text could have been taken from those other sources. Also pinging ASRASR as we are working together on those topics. EMsmile (talk) 03:23, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi EMsmile! That's a good question. You're absolutely right that it's less helpful when there's just a list of sources placed at the end of the article and it's hard to tell what is copied from which. Instead, we can indicate the attribution in an inline citation as in the following (go to the editing window to see how I've done it):

This is a sentence copied from a public domain source. This is a sentence copied from a CC BY 4.0 source. This is a sentence copied from a UNESCO source from that article.

References

So the trick is just to enclose it within the usual <ref></ref> tags, and then it becomes clear which source corresponds to each sentence in the article. Does that make sense? Let me know if you'd like me to take a closer look at the article itself. When I'm trying to figure out where something was copied from, sometimes it helps to Google short snippets enclosed in quotes, but I'm not sure how search-friendly these UNESCO sources are. DanCherek (talk) 03:35, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, that's helpful. Overall, I see so many flaws though. What happens when other people later build on those sentences and modify them. Then they are no longer "copied from this source". Or if people even delete whole paragraphs. I think this is what happened at education for sustainable development over time. It's only a small article with low pageviews so not worth spending much time on. I just picked it as a good example of how that "open source" indication can become quite useless over time. EMsmile (talk) 10:50, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I think that's what happened at that article — I see from the page history that the page size was >65 kB at one point, and it's now trimmed down to 17 kB. I'm not surprised that the attribution tags haven't been removed (because they are needed even if a little bit is copied and, as you've discovered, it's a hassle to figure out what is or isn't copied). That is one reason that I usually like to just write from scratch even when there are freely-licensed sources. Overall, I'd say it's not a huge deal to keep the attribution tags until you're sure that the article no longer includes any copying or close paraphrasing from the source, and no worries if it's been modified by others — after all, the tag does say "incorporates text from this source" rather than "copies text from this source" — and it's better to be safe than sorry. Hope that helps! DanCherek (talk) 11:52, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Jean Garcia

Hey fuck youu what is your problem on my article Nylankramwiki (talk) 12:34, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nylankramwiki, it looks like you are interested in writing about the actress Jean Garcia. Wikipedia has an existing article at Jean Garcia, so please feel free to edit that one by adding information supported by reliable sources. You created a duplicate article at Jean Garcia (Actress), so what I did was redirect that to the article that already exists because it doesn't make sense to have two different articles on the same person. DanCherek (talk) 12:38, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Question from Hak Da Navigator (05:29, 10 September 2021)

Hello --Hak Da Navigator (talk) 05:29, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm trying to make my page I'm a producer and have some big names I'm trying to get it when you touch my name it will bring you to my page Hak Da Navigator (talk) 05:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, Hak Da Navigator! Welcome to Wikipedia. It looks like you are looking to advertise yourself as a producer, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged — see our guideline on writing autobiographies. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site, so if you'd like to stick around, I would recommend looking for a subject that you're interested in and going from there. I see that another editor has put some useful welcome links on your talk page that can help you get started. Let me know if you have any additional questions. DanCherek (talk) 05:52, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Article Submission

Can you Submit my Draft Article ??? Sonybot (talk) 19:05, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Sonybot, your draft is not ready to be accepted at this time because it doesn't adequately demonstrate the subject's notability. However, first please note the issue that I mentioned on your talk page: usernames that end in "-bot" are generally reserved for authorized bot accounts. Before doing anything else, you should file for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account and use that for editing. Thanks — sorry if this is a hassle — and welcome to Wikipedia. DanCherek (talk) 19:09, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Done ... I've requested for username change ... It's on the way Sonybot (talk) 19:16, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Please Submit my Draft Sonybot (talk) 19:16, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

You can submit your draft for review by adding the code {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft (remember to switch to the source editor first). After you submit it, you should see a yellow box saying "Review waiting, please be patient." DanCherek (talk) 19:20, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Question from Bill settler (17:21, 13 September 2021)

Hello sir mentor I need help creating a wikipedia page --Bill settler (talk) 17:21, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Bill settler! Please see Help:Your first article for a detailed guide on creating your first article. The first thing I do when I want to create a new article is to determine whether the article topic is notable. This generally means that it has already been covered in detail in good references from independent sources. Make sure to summarize information in your own words, rather than copying content from other websites. Writing an article from scratch can be tough for new editors, so if you are finding it challenging, I would encourage you to edit existing articles for a while to get the hang of things. Let me know if you have additional questions or need more detailed guidance DanCherek (talk) 17:22, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Question from Usethenews (19:21, 14 September 2021)

how do i create a page that doesnt exist? thanks! --Usethenews (talk) 19:21, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Usethenews! For newer users, I recommend following the steps at WP:YFA, which include detailed instructions for creating a draft for your first article. The first thing I do when I want to create a new article is to determine whether the article topic is notable. This generally means that it has already been covered in detail in good references from independent sources. Make sure to summarize information in your own words, rather than copying content from other websites. Writing an article from scratch can be tough for new editors, so if you are finding it challenging, I would encourage you to edit existing articles for a while to get the hang of things. Let me know if you have additional questions or need more detailed guidance DanCherek (talk) 19:27, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

How to edit a named reference - adding CC BY 4.0 attribution template

Hi, thank you for adding the CC BY 4.0 attribution template to the Draft:Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Collection, Queensland article.

I have other draft articles that need this attribution added. How did you edit the named reference to include the CC BY 4.0 attribution  This article incorporates text available under the CC BY 4.0 license.? Or did you delete the citation and create a new citation with the attribution? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flimsy slicer (talk • contribs) 00:30, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Flimsy slicer, what I do with named references is to find the place where the reference is originally defined, and add the {{CC-notice}} to that citation. For example:

This is a sentence.<ref name="abc">Citation details. {{CC-notice|cc=by4}}</ref> Here is another sentence.<ref name="abc" />

will give you the following:

This is a sentence. Here is another sentence.

References

With the way named references work, if you include it in the original citation, then it will carry over to the other repetitions of that citation as well. If you want to transfer the attribution tag to an entirely different draft or article, then you will need to re-include the {{CC-notice}} tag. I hope that helps — let me know if that was confusing or if you have any questions! DanCherek (talk) 00:41, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello DanCherek,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

---

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Chaconne in G minor

On 17 September 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Chaconne in G minor, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that some music scholars have suggested that the Chaconne in G minor, widely attributed to Tomaso Antonio Vitali, is a musical hoax? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Chaconne in G minor. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Chaconne in G minor), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Syracuse History

Hi - I am the communications specialist and historian for the city of Syracuse. I am working on cleaning up the Syracuse, Utah page. Please do not delete my progress, especially when I am trying to add town history. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curatorlizzie (talk • contribs) 16:20, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@Curatorlizzie: Hello, and thanks for the message. First and foremost, since you have been editing the article of your employer, please read WP:Conflict of interest#Paid editors and provide the proper disclosure as required by Wikipedia's policies, and note that paid editors are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly, but may propose changes on talk pages by using the {{request edit}} template so that they can be peer reviewed.

Previously published content may be released by the copyright owner into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. I will point out, however, that Wikipedia is primarily interested in what reliable sources have to say about a particular subject, not what it says about itself, and so all information should still cited to reliable, independent, secondary sources. DanCherek (talk) 17:07, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chaconne in G minor

The article Chaconne in G minor you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Chaconne in G minor for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aza24 -- Aza24 (talk) 04:21, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Question from Editorial fixes (06:13, 21 September 2021)

Thanks for the welcome note, DanCherek. Any suggestions for me? --Editorial fixes (talk) 06:13, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@Editorial fixes: It looks like you're off to a great start. I hope you are enjoying the suggested edits on your homepage. Category:Digital forensics and Category:Computer forensics contain some articles related to digital forensics that you might be interested in editing. I'm also going to post a message on your talk page with some additional links that you may find useful. There are a lot of interesting parts of Wikipedia but I don't want to overwhelm you with too much right from the start! My talk page is always open if you have additional questions, so don't hesitate to reach out DanCherek (talk) 11:36, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Ford disambiguation.

I appreciate anyone who can slog through disambiguation cleanup but where the article is British related, the 'Ford' intended has a significant likelihood of being Ford of Britain or Ford of Europe. GraemeLeggett (talk) 05:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

@GraemeLeggett: Ack, my mistake. I’ll go through my DABs later today and re-adjust the ones I find. Thanks for the note. DanCherek (talk) 07:12, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I've altered ones that were on my watchlist where I thought Ford in Britain was intended, and a quick look over your contribs only only pulled up a couple worth investigating I did. All those motor racing ones are likely to be correct, or it's ambiguous which specific part of the Ford empire is meant and it will still be one of Ford's subsidiaries so Ford USA is not a 'wrong' link. GraemeLeggett (talk) 07:36, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Makes sense, thanks! DanCherek (talk) 12:04, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Odd chaos

THanks for removing that odd chaos I somehow added from reverting an IP who just added their signature. I have absolutely no clue how that happened. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 18:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

No problem DanCherek (talk) 18:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I published the edit and saw that and I was immediately like "What the hell did I do to cause this" so I went to revert my edit while still removing the IP signature but you beat me to it. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 18:37, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm guessing you might have accidentally clicked something or typed a few stray characters in the undo window, but no harm, no foul! DanCherek (talk) 18:39, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Probably because i was attempting to input the canned summary "Reverting vandalism or test edit" but the editor was lagging and I didn't realize what had happened because it was lagging and i was clicking. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#0001} 18:41, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for A Beautiful Crime

On 25 September 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A Beautiful Crime, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to Christopher Bollen, much of his 2020 novel A Beautiful Crime was written in a 17th-century monastery? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Beautiful Crime. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, A Beautiful Crime), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

D1

Can I quote this and put it in the article? I find those informations very important and I want to make them available on wikipedia. What should I do next?

1. The D1-like receptor family consists of 2 types of GPCRs that include the D1 and D5 receptors.

2. D1 receptors play an important role in the regulation of the reward system, locomotor activity, learning, and memory.

3. Informations about neurogenesis:

The role of dopamine signalling is further confirmed by dopamine receptor–mediated regulation of neurogenesis; for example, D1 receptor agonist treatment significantly increased hippocampal neurogenesis, whereas D2 receptor agonist treatment did not have an effect on progenitor cell proliferation and survival of hippocampal neurons in adult rats.

source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5985548/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hajperer (talk • contribs) 13:46, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Hajperer, thanks for the message and for your contributions to Wikipedia. Quotations are allowed within reason as long as it is clear that they are quotes and the source is attributed, but for information like this, it is often better to summarize and paraphrase the material in your own words. I sometimes find it helpful to read the source material, then try to summarize it without directly referring to it (of course you can look at it afterwards, but this might help avoid the temptation of using the same or substantially similar phrasing). Hope that helps! DanCherek (talk) 13:57, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Before I try to put this in the article about dopamine d1 receptor could you tell me if I will phrase it this way will it be added in the end?

1. D1 and D5 receptors are part of the D1-like receptor family which consists of those 2 types of GPCRs.

2. The important roles of the D1 receptors are being found in the regulation of memory, learning, reward system, and locomotor activity.

3. The signaling role of dopamine has been confirmed by dopamine receptor-mediated neurogenesis regulation. An example of this has been found in D1 receptor agonist treatment which significantly increased hippocampal neurogenesis, whereas D2 receptor agonists treatment did not have an effect on progenitor cell proliferation and survival of hippocampal neurons in rats.

I will change a little other information in the article to blend that in it. Can I try now with those sentences and hope for it being approved by you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hajperer (talk • contribs) 14:40, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

One issue here is close paraphrasing. That is what happens when the source text is only superficially modified and the overall structure is retained. Please see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing for more information. It looks like you started with the text from the article and changed some words here and there, but again I would recommend trying to write it from scratch to avoid the close paraphrasing issue entirely. It's definitely understandable, particularly with scientific topics, that there are some phrases that can't be reworded, but I think the wording above is still a little too close for comfort. Hope that makes sense. DanCherek (talk) 14:46, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your help and patience.

I would love to see those pieces of information included in the article, because they felt to me like a little discovery when I was reading that beforementioned article, so I will try again.

1. The two types of GPCRs that are part of D1-like receptor family are the receptors - D1 and D5.

connected with this: "Dopamine receptor D1, also known as DRD1, is a protein that in humans is encoded by the DRD1 gene."

this way: Dopamine receptor D1, also known as DRD1. It is one of the two types of D1-like receptor family - receptors D1 and D5. It is a protein that in humans is encoded by the DRD1 gene.(sources)

2. The important roles of the D1 receptors are being found in the regulation of memory, learning, reward system, and locomotor activity.

connected with this sentence from the current article: D1 receptors regulate the growth of neurons, mediate some behaviors, and modulate dopamine receptor D2-mediated events.

this way: D1 receptors regulate the memory, learning, and the growth of neurons, also is used in the reward system and locomotor activity, mediating some behaviors and modulating dopamine receptor D2-mediated events.(sources)

Now I am quite happy with those changes and I learned more about editing from you which I am thankful for. Are those sentences acceptable or should I add or change something?

3. The signaling role of dopamine has been confirmed by dopamine receptor-mediated neurogenesis regulation. An example of this has been found in D1 receptor agonist treatment which significantly increased hippocampal neurogenesis, whereas D2 receptor agonists treatment did not have an effect on progenitor cell proliferation and survival of hippocampal neurons in rats.

I have quite a predicament with the third sentence though. I can't find better wording for this for example "increased hippocampal neurogenesis" or "progenitor cell proliferation and survival of hippocampal neurons". Can I use them when I will be including the information from the research in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hajperer (talk • contribs) 15:16, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Hajperer: I think that's fine. Thanks again for your understanding and work on the article DanCherek (talk) 15:19, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

TFL notification

Hi, DanCherek. I'm just posting to let you know that List of awards and nominations received by Jake Gyllenhaal – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for October 15. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 (Talk) 15:40, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! DanCherek (talk) 15:42, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

I added the quantel product history which you deleted but I cannot understand why it wasn't allowed?

That is not breaking copyright — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.170.120.187 (talk) 17:07, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

The content that you added was copied verbatim from this website. If you scroll to the bottom, you'll see that it is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) International License, which is not compatible with Wikipedia because that license doesn't allow modification and commercial use of the material. (See WP:COMPLIC for more information on compatible licensing.) That's why we can't copy and paste from that site. However, you're welcome to summarize the material in your own words. Hope that makes sense! DanCherek (talk) 18:09, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

The New York Convention 1958

Hello DanCherek, Please the editing of the article on the Newyork Convention was actually incomplete as i was yet to cite the appropraite sources and add the references. Although, a youg editor and still learning editing process, i intended to update the article and do further editing and corrections. I will keep in mind for future edits. Please, help remove article.Thanks.

Library Services to the Visually Impaired Citizens of Oyo State, Nigeria Hello DanCherek, Please help remove article if it does not meet the required standard. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Temilolub.52021 (talk • contribs) 18:00, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Temilolub.52021! The material that you added was copied directly from this website and this one. This is not allowed, even if you cite the websites as references, because the text is protected by copyright. If you scroll to the bottom of the website you'll see the notice that says "© 2011-2021 All Rights Reserved". Everything that you add to Wikipedia needs to be written in your own words, please. I posted some information about the copyright policy on your talk page; let me know if you have any additional questions. DanCherek (talk) 18:13, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi DanCherek, I will endeavor to do the needful for future edits. My appologies, please.Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Temilolub.52021 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding, and happy editing! DanCherek (talk) 20:50, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Howard Fields (neuroscientist) page

Hello DanCherek, I see you are quite active on the page I am trying to create for Howard Fields (at his request). While I appreciate someone making sure I don't violate anything, I have removed the copied and pasted placeholder text from USCF and have re-written with my own words. I see it is still getting taken down. Any insight would be great. Thanks. DGranados0809 (talk) 00:28, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi DGranados0809, your revised version is an example of close paraphrasing. That's what happens when someone copies from a source and simply replaces some of the words with their synonyms, but the overall sentence structure is retained. Superficially modifying material from a non-free source is still copyright infringement. What you should do instead is write from scratch, in your own words. When writing articles, I sometimes find it helpful to read the source material, then try to summarize it without directly referring to it (of course you can look at it afterwards, but this might help avoid the temptation of using the same or substantially similar phrasing). Finally, please don't remove the {{Copyvio-revdel}} template yourself—it's there to notify an administrator that part of the page's history needs to be hidden, and they will remove the template after they have done that step. Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 00:33, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I just noticed that you mentioned that you are creating the page for Dr. Fields at his request. That is a conflict of interest, so please read the WP:COI guideline which has instructions on how to disclose your COI. I'll place some more information on your talk page about that. DanCherek (talk) 00:36, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi DanCherek, Thank you for all the input. No COI, I meant to put (at this request), meaning it was for the Howard Fields page specifically. Bad phrasing on my part after re-reading. How do I remove the copyright violation template or when will I know to remove? Thank you and apologies for my frustrated tone earlier. Thank you. DGranados0809 (talk) 02:41, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

A Wikipedia administrator will perform the revision deletion shortly (it depends on when someone has time to go through the revision deletion requests category) and they will remove the template after it has been done, so you don't need to worry about removing the tag. DanCherek (talk) 02:50, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

John von Neumann

edit conflicted with you n the RD1 request. Meters (talk) 04:42, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Haha, thanks for reverting the weird stuff there and at P versus NP problem. DanCherek (talk) 04:48, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Dropped a note about the socking at User talk:Favonian sicne that is where the original blocks came from. Meters (talk) 04:57, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I've also put in RFPP requests for temporary semi. DanCherek (talk) 04:59, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

New Man (utopian concept)

Hello Dan, I read your message on my talk page. I am a new person here who edited the New Man (utopian concept) page to include some information yesterday. Today I found that all of it was removed. Can you help me understand what may be the reasons for this? As Ordinary As Anyone (talk) 07:02, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi As Ordinary As Anyone! Thank you for your contributions, and welcome to Wikipedia. I'm very glad you are interested in working on the article. There were a few issues with the addition, though I don't want to discourage you from continuing to edit it. One issue was that the text before the quotes was not reliably sourced. For instance, you cited something from Sannyas Wiki, which is another wiki-based site that anyone can edit if they make an account. See WP:RS for more information—reliable, independent secondary sources should be used to support the material in the article. The second issue was that there were extremely long quotations from Osho. We shouldn't include paragraphs and paragraphs of quotes from someone in an article just because we can, particularly when the source is not freely licensed; in this case I think it would have been better to summarize the information in original prose, supported by shorter quotations if necessary. Hope that makes sense! Let me know if you have additional questions. DanCherek (talk) 12:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chaconne in G minor

The article Chaconne in G minor you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Chaconne in G minor for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aza24 -- Aza24 (talk) 05:41, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks!

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	For your awesome help at WP:RX  ♦ Lingzhi.Random (talk) 04:19, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Lingzhi.Random, best of luck with the article! DanCherek (talk) 07:40, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

October 2021 at Women in Red

Women in Red | October 2021, Volume 7, Issue 10, Numbers 184, 188, 209, 210, 211 Online events: New: Women in STEM New Contest (Oct/Nov/Dec): Women in Oceania contest Continuing: Women's rights | #1day1woman Special event: 12 October: Ada Lovelace Day 24-Hour Global Edit-a-thon See also: Women in Green Good Article Edit-a-thon Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help plan and coordinate future events. Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Follow Women in Red on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Rosiestep (talk) 01:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Draft article

Hi, DanCherek,
Hope you're fine! I've created an article in draft. And in this article, nothing I've copied from sources. This is the reply of this.
Thanks. ➤ Tajwar.thesuperman ^Talk 08:19, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! At Draft:Feluda Pherot, I fixed the translation attribution issue by using an edit summary here: Special:Diff/1046891391, and I placed a {{Translated page}} banner on the talk page. Please read Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia#Translating from other language Wikimedia projects to see instructions for how to do that for yourself in the future. DanCherek (talk) 12:05, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@DanCherek: Thanks! Can I unblocked from mainspace now? Thank you. — Tajwar.thesuperman ^{Talk • Contributions} 05:30, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm not an administrator, so I can't accept or decline your unblock request. Just be patient—you're only partial-blocked from mainspace, so there's still plenty you can do in the meantime, including working on drafts. DanCherek (talk) 12:19, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thank you for bringing a ludicrous amount of precision and scrutiny to my peer review! It really boosts SpaceX Starship's quality, as well as pointing me to the right direction to improve the article. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 14:13, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks CactiStaccingCrane! Ping me in the future if you want me to take another look. Good luck with the article. DanCherek (talk) 14:15, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

First timer - copywrite vio regarding Supreme Court decisions

Hi Dan,

Cary here.

This is my first time contributing and am making several pages. I am a Private Attorney General and am making references to legal definitions, statutes, and prior holdings of the courts. I got a copywrite violation for a definition of "Imperfect War". I use legal dictionaries and public law and those definitions are holdings directly from the courts and are public property. Any website or publication that displays holdings of the courts or public law do not own those laws ,nor the court decisions. They have no copyrights on those texts and only have copyrights on their own annotations, which I don't use. There was actually a recent case in the Supreme Court that re-affirmed this fact. It was decided that attempts to monopolize, or otherwise conceal or obfuscate, public law from the public, is a crime of theft and fraud. In this particular case, the definition of "Imperfect War" came from Black's Dictionary of Law, presented by TheLawDictionary.org, a non-profit. Black's uses prior decisions of the courts to provide actual legal definitions made by the courts. A definition from a court is ,essentially, irreducibly complex, decided law, and public property. TheLawDictionary.org has no copyrights over court decisions. In the article section, I reworded as much as I could without changing the definition of the word nor contradicting the courts, and I must be very cautious in not doing so. It is absolutely essential that I use the actual legal definitions given by the courts and public law. Further, I also use publicly broadcast writings from government sites, where a public servant may make annotations regarding the laws. Those writings are also public property because they are publicly funded. I try to link to Wikipedia pages, to keep traffic on Wikipedia, as much as possible. Where we may make direct quote from a for-profit business, like Merriam-Webster Dictionary, would it be acceptable to simply rewrite the word with a link-out to the Merriam-Webster site? For example - "See Merriam-Webster definition of 'Imperfect War' (linkout)" Where any publication uses court decisions or public law, those texts can, legally, be directly quoted in the article section. I prefer to use your citation method, rather than the court format in the article section, because it follows the Wikipedia motif. The goal is to get your readers to actual definitions and holdings they may effectively use in the courts. I help people, many who are victims of crime, who cannot afford attorneys, many of which have child custody and matters of actual harm hanging in the balance. Wikipedia can be a powerful, life-saving tool for them. I know you don't know the law like I do, so no harm done. I appreciate your attention and time. Please advise. Cheers,

Cary  — Preceding unsigned comment added by BuenSomeritano (talk • contribs) 17:08, 4 October 2021 (UTC) 

@BuenSomeritano: Hi Cary! You're right—I saw the copyright notice here and did not realize that their website was reusing material from court cases. You are welcome to reuse freely-licensed material on Wikipedia, including text in the public domain, but such content must be fully attributed (i.e., acknowledging that the source is copied). There is more information on how to do that here. I will ask an administrator to un-hide the original revision of your draft. Thanks, and let me know if you have any other questions! DanCherek (talk) 17:58, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

By the Sea (novel)

Saw you were taking on the noble task of adding our recent Nobelist's novels. I was thinking of doing the above, unless you had it in progress—wanted to check with you first. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 22:55, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

@AleatoryPonderings: Go right ahead, I haven't started on any of the remaining ones yet! Hoping to get at least stubs started for each of them and then go from there, so your help is appreciated. Thanks, DanCherek (talk) 22:58, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

CCI update

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Tajwar.thesuperman is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI!

Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 21:46, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Cedar Hill Yard GA Review

Hi DanCherek, You opened a GA Review on my nomination Cedar Hill Yard a week ago, but you have not posted any comments yet. Will you be reviewing it soon? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:42, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

@Trainsandotherthings I’ve been traveling out of state the past few days but was expecting to post my review within the next 12 hours. DanCherek (talk) 21:57, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Sean McGuire WIKI

Hello,

I see you that on October 12 you removed my contribution to this page. May I please ask why did you remove it? Is there something wrong with what I did? Thanks, Patrick Hurley — Preceding unsigned comment added by Towneswiki (talk • contribs) 23:12, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Towneswiki, I removed some text from Sean McGuire that was copied directly from the Dictionary of Ulster Biography website. If you are the editor who added that text, please note that edits to Wikipedia may not contain material from copyright sources unless used with permission. It is almost never okay to copy extensive text out of a book or website and paste it into a Wikipedia article with little or no alteration. For more information on this, see the policy on copyright and frequently asked questions on Wikipedia's copyright policy. Let me know if you have any other questions! DanCherek (talk) 23:23, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Salman21391 on Take It Easy (2015 film) (07:52, 15 October 2021)

hi I want to create article for filmmaker & actor how do I do it ? Thanks --Salman21391 (talk) 07:52, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Salman21391! From your talk page, it looks like you're trying to create an article about Sunil Prem Vyas. A very important thing to keep in mind when you're trying to create a new article is that the article's topic should be notable. This generally means that it has already been covered in detail in good references from independent sources. This is particularly important when you're writing a biography of a living person. Your draft currently doesn't have any references, which means that reviewers aren't able to verify whether the person is notable enough for a biography. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners for a guide on how to add reliable sources to the draft, and WP:NACTOR for additional information on how to determine whether an actor is notable. Let me know if you have any questions! DanCherek (talk) 11:51, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Changes to Cornerstone Barristers Wiki page

Hi Dan,

I hope you are well.

I wanted to get in touch as I am working on behalf of Cornerstone Barristers and they have instructed myself and my team to update their Wikipedia. The current information on there is very outdated and they would like it to reflect how the business operates now.

We went in to make these edits, which is all factually correct information, but we can see that yourself and Hut 8.5 have reverted these changes back.

Please can I ask that you allow us to make these updates on behalf of Cornerstone Barristers themselves. They are not vandalising their own page, simply updating it.

I would really appreciate a response.

Thank you and kind regards, Devon, Head of Client Experience at Evoke Media — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evokemedia (talk • contribs) 08:34, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Evokemedia. First, your username "Evokemedia" is not permitted by Wikipedia's username policy because it is the name of a company and implies shared use. Please visit Special:GlobalRenameRequest and request a new username that identifies you individually, such as "Devon at Evoke Media", or create a new account that complies with the username policy. I see you have been trying to copy text from Cornerstone Barristers' website into that article. Even if it was licensed compatibly, it was extremely promotional—basically pure advertising—and not appropriate for Wikipedia, where articles are written from a neutral point of view and supported by reliable, independent sources.

Please note: as a paid editor, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page, using the {{Paid}} template. Additionally, please read WP:PAID and WP:COI. Paid editors are very strongly discouraged from directly editing affected articles, and should post content proposals on the talk pages of existing articles (e.g., Talk:Cornerstone Barristers). You may find the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard helpful. DanCherek (talk) 11:43, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Dan, I have changed my name. Firstly, Cornerstone aren't paying us just to change the page. We act as the marketing department and one of our responsibilities is to ensure all information in the public domain is correct. The updates to the page were not being made to be outwardly promotional, but to ensure the page shows relevant and up to date information as the current page is outdated. I am not posting as a 'paid editor' but as someone from the business who would like the information to correctly reflect on said business. I would appreciate information on how it is best to ensure the Wikipedia page is not showing information that is no longer accurate or relevant. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evokemedia (talk • contribs) 12:00, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

You are "working on behalf of Cornerstone Barristers". That is absolutely considered paid editing on Wikipedia, and the paid-contribution disclosure is required. Even if the additions weren't meant to be promotional, they were, and much of that stems from the fact that paid editors have a significant conflict of interest. If there are changes that you feel should be made to the article, please create an edit request on the talk page at Talk:Cornerstone Barristers (you can use the {{request edit}} template) and it will be evaluated by another editor. DanCherek (talk) 12:09, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

So on Wikipedia you aren't able to edit your own page to provide more up to date information? The changes were in no way promotional. They were to add up to date information on cases, recent testimonials and the full list of notable members. It was also to remove inaccurate information about turnover which is factually incorrect. Will edits to the talk page be visible to other users? Is there not another way to make factual and relevant updates to a page without having to edit the talk page? It's important the page is true and reflects the business as it currently stands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.185.205 (talk) 08:42, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Cornerstone Barristers doesn't own their Wikipedia article, and making it a directory of cases and commendations of former members wasn't appropriate when that information wasn't referenced to reliable, independent sources (and contained things like bold and forthright leader of rugby union). When you make an edit request on the talk page using the {{request edit}} template, it will be added to a queue and assessed by an editor who will respond to the request and implement the changes as long as they are supported by a reliable secondary source. I see that none of the editors associated with Evoke Media have disclosed their paid-contributor status yet, and will remind you again that this is required before interacting with that article or its talk page. DanCherek (talk) 12:08, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Bookwormforevz (22:05, 17 October 2021)

hey i dont kno how to put in a image if it says it is copyright --Bookwormforevz (talk) 22:05, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Bookwormforevz! Welcome to Wikipedia. If the image you wish to upload is not under a free license, but meets all of Wikipedia's fair use criteria, then it can be uploaded directly to the English Wikipedia with a fair use rationale. Keep in mind that it is not permitted to upload fair use images to Wikimedia Commons. Also, please note that you will only be able to locally upload a non-free file on your own after you are autoconfirmed, which happens after you've been registered for four days and have made at least 10 edits. Hope that helps—let me know if you are wondering about a specific image or have any other questions. DanCherek (talk) 22:30, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Chishki, Busk Raion

Hi Dan,

Thanks for the explanation about copyright. New to the world of Wikipedia, and I obviously overstepped lawful boundaries. I happen to know the author of the book. She did NOT have an ISBN number for her work. Now she does. But she still has not applied it. How does copyright work for books that do not have ISBN numbers? Any different? Looking forward to your reply.

Regards, yaktam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yaktam (talk • contribs) 01:22, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Yaktam, thanks for the message and for your contributions to Wikipedia. ISBNs and copyright are not necessarily correlated, meaning that a book (or book description) can be protected by copyright even if it does not have an ISBN. Copyright exists as soon as a work is created, whereas the ISBN is a useful system for identifying and tracking versions of a book even though it might not be immediately issued, like you mention. Generally, everything you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words unless the material has been explicitly released into the public domain or under a compatible license, which is typically not the case with most books from the past century. Hope that makes sense! DanCherek (talk) 06:00, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Trim, cat

HI Dan, thank you for your message. I am new at this and still learning so any advice is welcomed. I am part of State Library Victoria (Melbourne, Australia) librarians team that are editing and adding information on Wikipedia pages as a side project. The text I added is mine, it is an article that I produced for the Library blog. I also linked the blog to the page and added it in References and the sources of my information are stacked there. The Copyright owners in this case it is me and the State Library from which I have permission to use all the information form the blogs and also to link the blogs and their sources to Wikipedia. I hope this sits well with Wikipedia rules.

Have a great day, AnaMariaSLV (talk) 03:11, 19 October 2021 (UTC)Ana

Hi AnaMariaSLV! Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Because the material has been previously published (by you) on the website which has a restrictive copyright policy, there are a few extra steps that you'll need to take to verify that the material is compatibly licensed with Wikipedia—meaning that it can be shared, distributed, transmitted, and adapted by anyone, as long as they provide attribution. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to do that. Sorry if this seems a little bureaucratic, but it's needed in order to verify that the text is properly released under a compatible license. Let me know if you have any questions! DanCherek (talk) 03:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Armand Hammer User talk:173.206.239.134

Hi Dan,

My apologies for unknowingly failing to observe the copyright rules as regards the changes I made to the Armand Hammer entry. However, I think it would still be beneficial to make the changes I suggested, though with different wording and, if necessary, different source material. I was motivated to make the change I did based on the PBS American Experience documentary about William Randolph Hearst which was based on the biographical book, The Chief, by David Nasaw. Part 2 of the four-hour documentary (and I suspect Nasaw's book included this as well) mentioned how Hammer had organized a massive sale of Hearst's artwork that was held on the fifth floor of Gimbels department store. The documentary did not include the other information that I tried to insert. Nevertheless, if there was a way for you to include this interesting tidbit of how Hammer and Hearst's lives intersected, with the American Experience documentary as the source material, I think that would be a worthwhile. I'm not really sure how to make that sort of entry with a television documentary as the source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.206.239.134 (talk) 06:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for your contributions. I haven't watched the documentary and am not super familiar with the subject matter, so I probably wouldn't be the best person to add that material to the article. But feel free to edit the article again and summarize information from reliable sources in your own words. When writing, I sometimes find it helpful to read the source material, then try to summarize it without directly referring to it (of course you can look at it afterwards, but this might help avoid the temptation of using the same or substantially similar phrasing). The {{Cite AV media}} template can be used to create citations for audio and visual works, including documentaries. Hope that helps! DanCherek (talk) 06:22, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Desi G Music (00:43, 21 October 2021)

How do I input data? is there a template? --Desi G Music (talk) 00:44, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Desi G Music, welcome to Wikipedia! Could you be a little more specific with your question—what kind of data are you trying to input? That will help me give a better answer. I'm also going to post a message on your talk page with some additional links that you may find useful. Feel free to drop me another message if you have additional questions! DanCherek (talk) 01:35, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft Review

Hello DanCherek, please can you help me out with this [[1]]. It has almost been 24 hours since I submitted it for review but it hasn't been reviewed yet. Thank you so much! Kind regards, 21:19, 7 October 2021 (UTC) Ugochukwu75 (talk)

Hi Ugochukwu75! Unfortunately, I don't have the time right now to give the draft the attention it deserves, sorry. Please feel free to work on other articles or drafts in the meantime, while it is in the queue. DanCherek (talk) 23:25, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Definitely, thanks for replying. 18:58, 8 October 2021 (UTC) Ugochukwu75 (talk)

• @DanCherek:, can you help me, please? I created this Donavon Warren and it's been good till Fred Zepelin showed up and blanked the page for no concrete reason. I don't want to enter a war of reverting edits with Fred Zepelin. Ugochukwu75 (talk) 20:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

You re-created a previously-deleted article, in a very devious way (why did you initially name it "EnrgTech LTD"? see: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donavon_Warren&diff=1039655274&oldid=1039380329). You added zero reliable sources. The wanna-be director has achieved no more notability since 2017 when his article was deleted. Given that his one film has dozens of fake user reviews on Metacritic and Amazon, and thousands of perfect "10" votes on imdb (while almost no one has ever seen it, and no actual movie critics have reviewed it) it seems very reasonable to assume that this was a massive astroturfing campaign. Also, you've already been questioned about your suspicious editing pattern, which led other editors to believe you might be getting paid to edit articles. (DanCherek, check Ugochukwu75's talk page). I didn't even know about that when I edited the film's article and the director's newly-restored article. The whole thing stinks to high heaven. Fred Zepelin (talk) 20:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

@Fred Zepelin: It looks like Ugochukwu75 used their sandbox as the origin for a previous article, EnrgTech LTD, and then did the same thing for Donavon Warren. Drafting articles in user sandboxes is a common practice, and the various page moves can result in strange-looking histories like this one. I don't see any deceptive intent from Ugochukwu75 in this regard.

@Ugochukwu75: The Donavon Warren article was deleted at AFD after a previous discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donavon Warren. Given this and the fact that the sourcing in your draft doesn't appear to be particularly strong (remember that interviews typically aren't an indication of notability), it would be best to create this as a draft and go through the AFC review process, even if it takes a while. I myself would go through AFC if I wanted to re-create an article that was previous deleted at AFD. I do appreciate your desire to avoid an edit war; those never end well. DanCherek (talk) 00:32, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

DanCherek Thanks for your explanation. Ugochukwu75 (talk) 09:28, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Cornerstone Solicitors

Dear Dan,

I recently made some changes to Cornerstone Solicitors page that they had requested, and I received a message from you a day later informing me the amends had been reverted. This is the first time I've been asked to amend anything on Wiki so I wondered if you could offer some guidance? It's not simply a case of editing the pages - is there an approvals process or better way to ensure the requested edits are made? I've been supplied a document with the changes that need making.

I look forward to hearing from you MivvyPW (talk) 09:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi MivvyPW! As a paid editor, you're required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post this mandatory disclosure to your user page, using the {{Paid}} template – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=MivvyPW|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Additionally, please read WP:PAID and WP:COI. Because paid editors are very strongly discouraged from directly editing affected articles, you should post content proposals on the talk pages of existing articles (e.g., Talk:Cornerstone Barristers). You may find the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard helpful. Please keep in mind that requested edits should be supported by reliable, independent sources, and that copying text from Cornerstone Barristers' website into the article is not appropriate for multiple reasons. Thanks, DanCherek (talk) 13:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from BassJoy (19:42, 21 October 2021)

Hello. I am taking a class at OU, and making a Wikipedia page is part of the class. I have been pretty confused. At this point, I am trying to find the Create an article button for the training module I am working. I cannot find it. I think I have made a mess of things. --BassJoy (talk) 19:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi BassJoy! It sounds like you are having issues about the Wiki Education module specifically. Perhaps an expert for Wiki Ed like Ian (Wiki Ed) can help? (You can try asking on their talk page at User talk:Ian (Wiki Ed)). I'm happy to answer any general questions about editing that you have, but I just want to make sure you're getting the most accurate information for your course module. Thanks, DanCherek (talk) 23:17, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for pinging me, DanCherek. BassJoy, if you send me an email at ianwikiedu.org we can sort out the problem you're having. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:18, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello

Hi DanCherek, in morning someone said the page I created had a copyright violation, so I was not sure what was it, as you have reverted it back so should I wait for someone to review the page or I can move it by myself? --Static Hash (talk) 18:38, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Static Hash, I have returned the draft to the review queue, so it will be reviewed by an Articles for Creation reviewer at some point. Because it was declined in September for notability reasons, I recommend letting it go through the review process again rather than moving it to mainspace yourself. DanCherek (talk) 18:41, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi yes, I have fixed it on 5 October and sent it for review, I will wait too. Thanks again --Static Hash (talk) 18:59, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

No problem! There were a few drafts that a particular reviewer had declined as copyright violations that in fact were not, and unfortunately yours happened to be one of them. Hopefully the issue has been resolved, thanks for your understanding. DanCherek (talk) 20:53, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 at Women in Red

Women in Red | November 2021, Volume 7, Issue 11, Numbers 184, 188, 210, 212, 213 Online events: New: Film + Stage | Endocrine health Contest (Oct/Nov/Dec): Women in Oceania contest Continuing: Women's rights | #1day1woman See also: Wikipedia Asian Month 2021 Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help plan and coordinate future events. Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Follow Women in Red on social media: Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Innisfree987 (talk) 21:27, 24 October 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Anchor Varun on User:Anchor Varun (15:09, 25 October 2021)

How to create wikipedia yourself --Anchor Varun (talk) 15:09, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Anchor Varun, and welcome to Wikipedia! Are you asking about how to create an article about yourself? Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. This is because it is difficult to write a neutral, verifiable autobiography, and there are many pitfalls. Instead, I would encourage you to pick an article that you are interested in and edit it, making sure that what you write is written neutrally, written in your own words, and supported by reliable sources. I'm also going to post a message on your talk page with some additional links that you may find useful as you get started. If I misunderstood your initial question, please let me know! DanCherek (talk) 15:14, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for helping me and appreciating my work. You are my best friend!Thanks ---✨LazyManiik✨ 15:12, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Lazy Maniik! You're doing great. My talk page is always open if you have any questions or want to talk about anything. DanCherek (talk) 15:15, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I am Fail in this Field

@DanCherek: Dancherek At this point in time I am thinking that from today I will not review any draft submissions because I have failed in this area.Best Regards.---✨LazyManiik✨ 13:27, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lazy Maniik, you are making good contributions to Wikipedia and Articles for Creation, and I hope you won't let a good-faith mistake change that. No one expects any reviewer to be perfect. I've made mistakes before as well (and will absolutely make more in the future), and the best thing any of us can do is learn from them because they help us become better editors and reviewers. Take a break if you feel like you need to, but please don't be discouraged. My talk page is always open if you want to discuss anything. DanCherek (talk) 13:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

I am not a good Afc Reviwers and But I'm lost in this area, but I'm a tentative AFC review. I will lose this advance right after 3-6 months.Best Regards.---✨LazyManiik✨ 13:36, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Reviewing can be tricky, and you will get better at it with experience. Again, reviewers (particularly new reviewers) are not expected to be perfect, and there are lot of people who are willing to help with any questions that you might have with any part of the process. For AfC, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation is a particularly helpful talk page where reviewers can ask questions, or get second opinions, about drafts that they're reviewing. DanCherek (talk) 13:40, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Can you help me review this Draft:Lixus: The “Temples quarter”.Best Regards. ---✨LazyManiik✨ 13:50, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

@Lazy Maniik: Another reviewer has pointed out that there is substantial overlap with Lixus (ancient city), and I think I would agree. There's no need to have two articles on Lixus and it would confuse people who wouldn't know which article to add information to. I'll let you make the final call, but if you think the information should be merged to Lixus (ancient city), you can select "mergeto" as a decline reason and write "Lixus (ancient city)" in the "Article which submission should be merged into" field. Hope that makes sense. DanCherek (talk) 13:55, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Please see-Draft:Lixus: The “Temples quarter”.Best Regards.---✨LazyManiik✨ ---✨LazyManiik✨ 14:13, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Looks good to me... nice work. DanCherek (talk) 14:18, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

thanks! and see Draft:Ameya Prabhu.Best Regards. ---✨LazyManiik✨ 14:23, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

There are some good reviews of The Rock Babas and Other Stories, but the sources about Prabhu himself are either interviews, non-independent biographies, or articles don't really talk about him in detail. The draft also has a serious issue in that there is information that is not supported by the given references, which is especially important for biographies of living persons. So my opinion would be that it should not be accepted in its current state. DanCherek (talk) 14:33, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

may i decline or rejected it..Best Regards. ---✨LazyManiik✨ 14:42, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

"Decline" is the right way to go in this case. "Reject" is not commonly used, and is typically reserved for drafts that are hopelessly non-notable or are contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia (here is one that I rejected), but this isn't true for the Prabhu draft. The editor should be given a chance to add more sources and fix the issues in the draft, and resubmit it for reconsideration. DanCherek (talk) 14:48, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

ok ! i gave chance to editor to add more reliable source with contents and thanks! for helping me for in reviwes.

.Best Regards.---✨LazyManiik✨ 14:55, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

No problem, keep up the good work DanCherek (talk) 14:56, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

please see last time this Draft:Ameya Prabhu?..Best Regards.---✨LazyManiik✨ 15:05, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

That looks fine to me, though it might be helpful to leave a draft comment with more explanations about the sources. New editors often aren't familiar with Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources and significant coverage. Leaving a comment isn't required of course—and it varies among reviewers—so just be ready to explain the decline if the editor asks you about it. DanCherek (talk) 15:09, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

ok !I am ready for this and once again thank you very much. Best Regards.---✨LazyManiik✨ 15:18, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Please Help Me

@DanCherek: before 1 day ago i accepted a draft submission but he have been adding in discussion of article for deletion and Wouldn't it make any difference to the rights beyond.Please see -Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British and Romanian Royal Families.Best Regards. ---✨LazyManiik✨ 12:38, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@Lazy Maniik: Are you asking whether it'll impact your probationary status as a reviewer? I wouldn't focus too much on that, just do your best going forward. Remember that the AfC reviewing instructions say to accept drafts that you think are "likely to survive an AfD nomination", and likely does not mean 100 percent, so it's not the end of the world for one of your accepted drafts to be put up for deletion. I see you have been getting more involved in !voting in AfD discussions which is great, because you'll become more familiar with the notability guidelines and get a better sense for when a draft would or wouldn't survive AfD. DanCherek (talk) 12:45, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! to answer me and please see Draft:Star Wars (2013 comic book) this draft i am searching on google notability of this topic can you help me But I can't confirm whether this topic is worth mentioning or not?.Best Regards. ---✨LazyManiik✨ 12:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

What's your thought process so far? What do you think of the draft's sourcing, particularly in the Reception section? DanCherek (talk) 13:02, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Context looks good but welcome is better. In my opinion this submission can be accepted at this time but what is your opinion about this topic?Best Regards.---✨LazyManiik✨ 13:15, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I think the series has received enough significant coverage in reliable sources to be notable. DanCherek (talk) 13:26, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I can accept this submission at this time and please check my contribution in few minutes I have accepted two articles about one place and looking forward to more draft submissions for review about this topic.Best Regards. ---✨LazyManiik✨ 13:35, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Where should I start?

Following my unblock, I am little confused on where to start(Just finished reading all my AN notice messages). What should I edit first? SoyokoAnis - talk 17:31, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@SoyokoAnis: Because I think the community is still a little apprehensive about your participation in things like countervandalism, tagging, etc., I would definitely recommend making content creation your primary focus here, at least in the short term. Try to improve articles you're interested in, making sure that what you write is written neutrally, written in your own words, and supported by reliable sources. If that is related to video games, as you indicated in your unblock request, please read WP:VG/RS very closely for guidance. DanCherek (talk) 17:36, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! Also, I don't plan on working on CV for a little while now but thanks. SoyokoAnis - talk 17:37, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Cool, good luck DanCherek (talk) 17:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

@DanCherek One more question, where would I find a list or category of articles that need editing or copy-editing, for example Simple English has a list and many sublists of articles that need referencing or copy-editing. SoyokoAnis - talk 19:35, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Articles tagged with {{copyedit}} or similar templates are listed in Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit. You can also visit Wikipedia:Community portal/Opentask for a list of random articles that have been tagged for improvement. DanCherek (talk) 19:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

ABOUT MY AFC WORKS

@DanCherek: I'm prohibited from not reviewing AFC articles DRAFT Submission.please see my talkpage.(I AM Very Sad for that ,I'm thinking of not editing Wikipedia in a few days now ,I'm telling you because I consider you my best friend).Best Regards.---✨LazyManiik✨ 16:15, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lazy Maniik, Bonadea is a very experienced editor and reviewer, so I would definitely encourage you to follow their advice. By editing existing articles and continuing to participate in Articles for Deletion discussions, you will gain familiarity with notability guidelines and when a draft is or is not appropriate for mainspace, and that will help you to be a better reviewer in the future. Take a break if you need to; that is healthy, particularly if Wikipedia is causing you to be stressed out. Your contributions are appreciated and I hope you will return once you feel more refreshed. DanCherek (talk) 16:33, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

I'll be on Wikipedia soon for editing thanks for answer me at this time.Best Regards.---✨LazyManiik✨ 16:49, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

A Beautiful Crime

• Thank you! DanCherek (talk) 03:13, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

help with noted Holocaust scholar Wiki entry

Hi DanCherek! I've started a page for Joan Ringelheim, who pioneered the study of women and the Holocaust, and I'm having some trouble getting it accepted. You were so helpful last time, any chance I could ask you to take a look and help? Cheers Mononoke99 (talk) 12:16, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mononoke99! I think the draft needs better sourcing to demonstrate notability. The Washington Post obituary is substantive but the New York Times source contains only a passing mention of Ringelheim, and the other three references are primary sources. I'd suggest including additional references that cover Ringelheim or her work in detail. Also, I removed some text that was copied from the Holocaust Memorial Museum's website, so please make sure everything is written in your own words. Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 12:43, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi DanCherek! Really helpful, thanks!!! Mononoke99 (talk) 12:46, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi again DanCherek! I've beefed it up some more with some other references to the conference in 1983 with direct mention of Ringelheim's work and influence. Hoping that helps...? ;) Mononoke99 (talk) 13:19, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

It looks like another user has already moved it to mainspace, so nice work. DanCherek (talk) 13:59, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't know how to edit

Hello Dan you've edited something about Will Smith saying "unknown source" or something, while the truth is that it's actually Will Smith "added" that. Talking about https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Will_Smith&diff=1040511115&oldid=1040129951 and the sauce is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1r8gpBwxyY&t=314s I'm unsure on how to edit Wikipedia so I'm giving this task to you as you did removed it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.228.63.82 (talk) 11:11, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! I don't think that's right—the quotation I removed doesn't correspond to the edit shown in the video, and in fact it had been in the article for quite a while. I removed it because Wikipedia's verifiability policy dictates that all quotations must include an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material, and this one did not. Hope that makes sense! DanCherek (talk) 12:34, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello again, OK understood, thanks for the clarification. As stated - I'm unsure of how Wiki does things. All best in your endeavours! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.228.63.82 (talk) 17:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

No problem. You too, and thanks for the messages. DanCherek (talk) 19:07, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for fixing my edit here, I forgot to subst the pattern for getting the disambiguation page. ― Qwerfjkltalk 21:12, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

No problem! I figured that's probably what had happened. DanCherek (talk) 21:50, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing

Hi. I understand that some of my edits breached the copyvio policy, but I didn't copied a whole lot. I tried to rephrase it, so the plot has a meaning. I tried to look for the film Here Comes Hell on Netflix and checked my library even, but found nothing. What should I do?--Filmomusico (talk) 01:16, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Your summary still duplicated phrases from the source, like "Unfortunately, Madame's efforts are too successful", and it's clear that the rest of it was derived from the same source, with a few words replaced with their synonyms ("infamous" → "renown", "chum" → "buddy", etc.). The way to write a plot summary, if you are having issues with paraphrasing, is to watch the film and write it from scratch in your own words, without initially referring to the source as you write it, to avoid retaining its sentence structure and style. DanCherek (talk) 02:05, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Additional note that it's okay to create film articles that don't have a plot summary. There are many such examples on Wikipedia. Eventually someone else will come along and write one, and in the meantime having no plot is preferable to one that is copied from elsewhere. DanCherek (talk) 15:17, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, but our readers probably would like to know the plot.--Filmomusico (talk) 16:25, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

How about instead of deleting a whole plotline try to rewrite it in your own words, if you seem so knowledgeable? :)--Filmomusico (talk) 16:28, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Sometimes I do, but ultimately the onus is on the editor adding the material. And if an entire plot summary is a copyright violation, then yes, I'll remove it all. It's unreasonable to add copyright material to Wikipedia and then repeatedly expect others to clean up after you. This appears to be a persistent issue, so if you continue to do so, I will raise the issue at AN/I. DanCherek (talk) 16:38, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

I will try my best to avoid AN/I. However, if you are so smart in copyvios then explain to me why IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes can copy plot from each other?!--Filmomusico (talk) 16:45, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Here is a good example: 1, 2, 3. Care to explain?--Filmomusico (talk) 16:49, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia has its own copyright policy which is different from sites like Rotten Tomatoes and IMDb. Every time you press the "Publish changes" button to save an edit, you affirm that you release your contributions under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. Copying plot descriptions and presenting them as your original contributions is incompatible with that licensing scheme. DanCherek (talk) 16:51, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Isn't close paraphrasing protected under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL?--Filmomusico (talk) 16:54, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing, which states: Close paraphrasing without in-text attribution may constitute plagiarism, and when extensive (with or without in-text attribution) may also violate Wikipedia's copyright policy, which forbids Wikipedia contributors from copying an excessive amount of material directly from other sources. This applies to the plot descriptions that you superficially modified. DanCherek (talk) 16:57, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

So, what you are saying is that if I will provide a source for my closed paraphrasing material I should be fine?--Filmomusico (talk) 16:59, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

No, and it feels like we're going in circles while you try to justify your continued copying without reading the policy pages that have the answers to your questions and explain why it's not okay, so I'm not sure how productive this discussion is going to be. DanCherek (talk) 17:04, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

No. I'm not going in circles, I am trying to understand. You quoted that Close paraphrasing without in-text attribution may constitute plagiarism, which as I understand it, if an editor provides a source, he can be scott-free. If, however, this is not how it is, then I am baffled.--Filmomusico (talk) 17:09, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Maybe you will give me that tool that you use to determine copyvios, that might ease my pain and will free you from labeling articles as copyvios?--Filmomusico (talk) 17:20, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

@Filmomusico Let me try to make it clear; you can't add material to an article if that material is substantially similar to another source. If you state (attribute) where that text came from in the text of the article and present the text as something like a quote and cite a source, then that would be ok and would not fall afoul of our guidelines on copyright violations or plagiarism. The plot summary you added to Here Comes Hell was not cited to the source (plagiarism) it was substantially similar (a copyright violation), so it was removed from the article and deleted from the page history. Even if you had provided a source, the content would have been removed as a copyright violation. Does that make things more clear?

A few different tools can be used to detect copyright violations, one of them is Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which compares URL's to Wikipedia articles and shows overlap. It doesn't detect close paraphrasing well, it is more useful with detecting obvious pastes. The percentage is irrelevant to the actual overlap. Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk/CCI guide} 18:32, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

OK. Thank you all. Moneytrees was especially helpful in providing the tool. I will see what I can do and how. Hopefully I won't get in any more trouble. :)--Filmomusico (talk) 19:11, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Love Productions

Hello, can you arranged the productions table in order? 85.255.236.108 (talk) 15:14, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Sure, I've alphabetized them. DanCherek (talk) 15:21, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello, can you rearrange the table in the correct airing order please?. 185.69.145.75 (talk) 19:42, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Multistory Media

Hello can you arrange the table to multistory media programs table in the correct airing order please? 185.69.145.75 (talk) 19:43, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. I took a closer look and it's clear these requests are coming from a blocked user, and I'm not going to be a proxy for block evasion. DanCherek (talk) 20:01, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Plant Ecology and Evolution

Dear DanCherek, you marked the page Plant Ecology and Evolution for speedy deletion because of possible copyright infringement. However, I am the current editor in chief of this journal and I wrote both the text on Wikipedia and on the journal website. There are also only so many ways to describe the history of the journal. I hope the tag can be removed now. Orbicule (talk) 08:23, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for how to grant permission to copy material already online. Writing about your own journal is also an obvious conflict of interest which should have been disclosed (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI). DanCherek (talk) 12:01, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Question from RiverKo (14:46, 5 November 2021)

Hi DanCherek, being new to editing I didn't realise that I needed to use the article talk pages to propose a topic to add to an article where I have a disclosed interest /close affiliation, although I am not being paid to edit. I was hoping to propose the topic so that others could then add relevant information to the article to be able to share the knowledge globally. I have now put the main proposed edit forward for consideration in the talk section for other editors to review, given my original edit was understandably deleted from the article. However, the main article has also been flagged as "may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view." Is there anyway that I can invite a clean up by other neutral editors so that this tag can be removed from the article page or is it best to add a request with full explanation to the original editor that flagged the page for clean up on their talk page? I appreciate there is a backlog for support and everyone is very busy so many thanks in advance for your help! --RiverKo (talk) 14:46, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi RiverKo, welcome to Wikipedia! The edit request on the talk page is the right step and it will be reviewed at some point by another editor. In the article's current state, the excessive amount of detail that is either unsourced or poorly sourced is likely why that tag was applied. You can open a new discussion on the article's talk page and ping that editor to get their thoughts on how the article should be cleaned up, or ask for assistance from more editors at the Teahouse. I expect the answer will involve trimming a lot of that extraneous information and ensuring that the rest is supported by citations to reliable, independent secondary sources. Hope that helps. DanCherek (talk) 19:29, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

West Ninth Street

You marked this page for speedy deletion due to potential copywrite infringement. The original post in the Encyclopedia of Arkansas was written by the Arkansas Dept of Heritage, which I am also an employee of. We reserve the right to duplicate printed materials within our department. Therefor this cannot be a copyright infringement and will need to be restored, thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Courtvonderhaas (talk • contribs) 20:49, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Because the material has been previously published online with a restrictive copyright notice, either the website needs to add a statement that the text is released under a compatible license, or you'll need to go through a special verification process to grant Wikipedia permission to use the material. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information about each of those options. DanCherek (talk) 01:40, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Award

		The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		It seems that you have written 25 Did You Knows (and many more!!) and no one has noticed. That can never be the case, thousands of people will have seen your DYKs and thousands will know just a bit more. You have improved the front page, the DYK project, and to top it all, helped to build an amazing free educational resource. So thanks Victuallers (talk) 10:35, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Victuallers, this was a very nice surprise to wake up to! I appreciate it a lot as well as your occasional assist with improving a DYK-nominated Women in Red article. Thanks for all you do. DanCherek (talk) 11:57, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Convert the Draft: Buddhism in Tuva to Wikipedia articles

Please bro help to convert it Kheshig samurai (talk) 07:25, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

All of the text in the draft was copied from the Tuva article, which is not particularly long, so I'm not really seeing a reason to split out a stub from the main article. Hope that makes sense. DanCherek (talk) 12:03, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

That text was created by me when I did not created the account Kheshig samurai (talk) 12:54, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

That Time I do not know how to create Wikipedia page. Kheshig samurai (talk) 12:55, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Please change name Buddhism and Eastern religions to Buddhism and East Asian religions

This article is about Buddhism and East Asian religion not Buddhism and Eastern religion

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_Eastern_religions Kheshig samurai (talk) 13:00, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

OP has been checkuser-blocked at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nittin Das. DanCherek (talk) 21:48, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Ultranet Shpk

Hello Dan, I am Andrea Gjecaj, Network Administrator at UltraNet Shpk, our company is created in 2002 and we now are starting to create website and social media accounts, I have full rights to the website and social media accounts for the posts and articles online. The article at our website is published 3 months ago. Can you please check again our wiki page UltraNet SHPK Thank You Angjecaj (talk) 07:28, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Angjecaj, thanks for the message. Since you have been editing the article of your company, please read WP:Conflict of interest#Paid editors and provide the proper disclosure as required by Wikipedia's policies. A Wikipedia article is not like a Facebook or LinkedIn profile that you can set up and have full control over, and it is not an avenue for promotion. Previously published content may be released by the copyright owner into either the public domain or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. I will point out, however, that Wikipedia is mostly interested in what independent secondary sources have to say about a particular subject, not what it says about itself. For that reason, basing most of an article on a company's own website isn't appropriate either. Instead, I suggest trying to identify coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the company. Hope that helps. DanCherek (talk) 13:05, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Question from Sirmasala wawe (20:03, 8 November 2021)

How can you pls assist me with crating my biography? --Sirmasala wawe (talk) 20:03, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sirmasala wawe, and welcome to Wikipedia! Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. This is because it is difficult to write a neutral, verifiable autobiography, and there are many pitfalls. Your first attempt at an autobiography has already been deleted by an administrator. Instead, I would encourage you to pick an article that you are interested in and edit it, making sure that what you write is written neutrally, written in your own words, and supported by reliable sources. There are some additional links that have been posted on your talk page that you may find useful as you get started. If you have any other questions, please let me know! DanCherek (talk) 20:08, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Have the Men Had Enough? ‎

Hi Dan, I added https://www.proquest.com/docview/244518976/CF1258460D614753PQ/7?accountid=196403 to the request but it then disappeared, Can you send it to me ? Thanks GrahamHardy (talk) 18:26, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I thought you had just been asking about whether you could access the original ProQuest document on your own and didn't notice that you added a second request. I've restored it to the main request page for now. DanCherek (talk) 18:57, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Now Sent via email. DanCherek (talk) 19:06, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Thankyou ! GrahamHardy (talk) 19:31, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Removing speedy deletion tag

We are not promoting or doing the advertisement of our organization.We are just providing information about our organizations and what we are doing for society. This page is still in the development phase and we will soon edit it with more information. Can you please remove the speedy deletion tag on this page .--Centraltpovp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Centraltpovp (talk • contribs) 06:54, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but it is extremely promotional (phrases like the Institution has majestically scaled the ladder of success with a profundity that aptly reflects its commitment are not appropriate for Wikipedia in any way) and is also a violation of the copyright policy as it is all copied directly from Vidya Pratishthan's website. A Wikipedia article is not like a Facebook or LinkedIn profile that you can set up and have full control over. Additionally, since you have been editing the article of your organization, please read WP:Conflict of interest#Paid editors and provide the proper disclosure as required by Wikipedia's policies. Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 12:40, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Copyright within Wikipedia

Hi DanCherek. Thank you so much for telling me about the copyright violation made inadvertently. And thanks for adding a summary too😀 Vroomair (talk) 00:41, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

No problem! Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and happy editing. DanCherek (talk) 00:47, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

		Editor of the Week
		Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project)

User:Eddie891 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:

Since joining in late 2020, User DanCherek has quickly become a highly competent quality editor and a major net positive here. I first met him quickly and helpfully fulfilling requests at the resource exchange and have since seen him around frequently. He is a major asset in copyright cleanup, counter-vandalism, username violations and distinguishes himself with kind and competent answers to questions. More than half of his 33K edits are to mainspace. Dan is also a prolific content writer, with four GAs and one featured list, 59 articles created with 47 of them high quality DYK articles and including many new articles on women in red. Dan somehow does it all, and does it all well! This award was seconded by User:Gwennie-nyan

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:

{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}

Member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Copyright Cleanup

DanCherek

Editor of the Week for the week beginning November 14, 2021

In one year DanCherek has quickly become a highly competent, net positive WlikEditor. He fulfills requests at the resource exchange, does copyright cleanup, counter-vandalism, and is always kind and competent. 53% of his 33K edits are to mainspace. A prolific content writer w/ 4 GAs, 1 featured list and 59 articles created with 47 of them high quality DYK articles and articles on women in red.

Recognized for

Active participation in improving WP

Notable work

The House of Asterion

Submit a nomination

Thanks again for your efforts! ―Buster7 ☎ 17:04, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

This is a great surprise! Thank you Eddie891 for thinking of me. I'm really happy to be able to help out where I can. I appreciate all you do for the project too, you're an awesome editor and role model. Many thanks as well to Buster7 and Gwennie-nyan. DanCherek (talk) 18:00, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words, Dan, and thanks again for all the hard work you have put in-- Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:25, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 57th Mountain Division (India)

Hello Dan,

Suspected Copywrite content already deleted . Don't understand why you want to tag it again .

Respond ASAP .

Pratik Roy 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Because most of the remaining text at that point was still copied from elsewhere. I have removed the remaining copied text and tagged the article for revision deletion. DanCherek (talk) 19:42, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

I hope you are happy now . It is easy to remove rather than add . Think the other side too.(I mean you could have add a new line on the replaced line , instead of just deleting it .) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pratik89Roy (talk • contribs) 19:46, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Simply, the answer is to not copy material from other websites into Wikipedia in the first place, as you have been advised several times now [2][3]. DanCherek (talk) 19:54, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Question from Piprit (20:07, 14 November 2021)

Hello Dan, I tried to add a line to Tom Burke's page. I tried to add Extinction as a Sky TV series which will be shown in early 2022 but I appear to have combined his TV work with his theatre work. Please could you advise what I should do --Piprit (talk) 20:07, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Piprit, and welcome to Wikipedia! Tables can be very tricky to work with even for experienced editors. I recommend using the VisualEditor which can make it a bit easier. For now, I have restored the last stable version of the article from 28 October, and it already includes Extinction as one of Burke's upcoming projects in the last row of the "Television" table. If you would like to add the scheduled release date, just change "TBA" to "2022". Let me know if I can help further! DanCherek (talk) 20:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you

November songs

... for help with Bach sourcing! Today 3 DYK, Brahms depicted + sadly Aga Mikolaj (listen!). May the roads that we travel make us meet again! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:04, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello Gerda, thanks for the music and for thinking of me! The Lieder and the hymn are lovely. Recently, I learned that Andrew Webster, whose article I initially removed a lot of (due to copyright issues) but then re-wrote after a heartfelt message from his son, sadly died. I noticed it too late for an RD nomination, but I'm still happy to have worked on the article. Thanks for all you do in memory of others, and best of luck with the FAC. DanCherek (talk) 20:13, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! I worked now on Hilmar Kopper a bit but it's just not my field of expertise, so didn't make it for RD. - Perhaps I'll create an article on his wife and mention him. I remember that we wrote an article about a soprano, Anne Sharp, on the initiative of her daughter, and how the old lady enjoyed the DYK. She died the same year. I'm happy that we created Aga Mikolaj's while she was alive, just this year, with a good DYK, I think. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:22, 14 November 2021 (UTC)