User talk:Sennecaster/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

welp, i lost a bet

here you are! :) feel free to link to this diff as proof that i have ceded these QPQs to you.

1. Template:Did you know nominations/WKXG
2. Template:Did you know nominations/WTQX
3. Template:Did you know nominations/The Wolf and the Lion (film)

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 04:25, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Deleting all of Byzantine–Venetian war of 1171

Dear Sir/Madam, Why did you delete practically all of the content of the following page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine%E2%80%93Venetian_war_of_1171 It is now a complete husk with the only work remaining being a conclusion and some references of no use as now we have no idea what they were referencing. If you were worried about a copyright issue, why not just read into the text further and find additional sources rather than carving up the corpse and leaving only the fingernails behind. Kind Regards, NotAnotherNameGuy (talk) 12:22, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

@NotAnotherNameGuy, I understand why you are upset, but there was over eight thousand bytes of text that were directly copy and pasted from an outside source. It is not the obligation of someone who finds the copyright to rewrite everything themselves, but rather the person that inserted the copyvio to not violate copyright in the first place. If there is copyvio, you need to remove it before you start expanding, or rewrite it entirely. I urge you to read WP:CV#Parts of article violate copyright to understand exactly why we do not just add more sources to copyright-violating text on Wikipedia.

Addendum: it is generally not the most welcomed to address fellow editors as Sir or Madam on Wikipedia. Most people prefer to be directly addressed with their username or other stated nickname. Sennecaster (Chat) 17:06, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol needs your help!

New pages awaiting review as of June 30th, 2023.

Hello Sennecaster,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Article move

Hello,

A week ago, you agreed to move the Niké Liga article to Slovak First Football League. However, this change still did not take place. Could you please look at it? Thanks a lot. Penepi (talk) 22:48, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Penepi: I've done the move, but I don't have time right now to do the retargeting, so I'll get to them later. Thank you for reminding me! Sennecaster (Chat) 23:25, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Guidance for a potential copyright issue

Hello Sennecaster! I'm reaching out to you based on your inclusion in the active list of copyright clerks. I'm a long-time lurker who has gradually started to contribute more actively on enwiki, primarily in copyedits.

I've been using the app interface's "suggested edits" tool, and while suggesting an edit for the article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Short, I decided to look into its subject more (I'm a Digital Humanities scholar who had not heard of him before).

Unfortunately, this led me to quickly discover that the long-standing lede paragraph in his article is pulled nearly verbatim from his personal bio on his university website, which lists a standard copyright at the page footer. In fact, the bio in question is included as a linked reference for later content in the wiki article. From my initial review, though, it is only the article's lede which is potentially too closely phrased to this source reference.

I read a bit about enwiki's policies here, and while I think it's a clear circumstance where the wiki text was copied from the other website, I don't feel confident navigating things like adding a tag to this article myself to alert of the issue. I'd happily volunteer to write a new lede paragraph in my own words, as this is clearly an area of interest for me, but I wanted to request guidance first about how to go about this:

Is it crucial to tag the article for potential copyvio as a first step, to formalize the concern for public visibility?

Or would it be acceptable to merely stage the changes to the lede and include the explanation about copyright concerns as justification for those changes in the accompanying edit summary?

Thanks for your time in reviewing my questions here, please let me know if you need any other information! Chiselinccc (talk) 04:14, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

@Chiselinccc; It's not necessary to tag it, if you entirely rewrite the text with copyright concerns then that's sufficient enough to remove the issue. If it's recent, you can request revision deletion using {{cv-revdel}}, but it's not usually used on longstanding articles. Something to keep in mind, as it happens a lot with academics, is that this might be a case of WP:LIMITED. If there isn't a way to state something without losing clarity, it is considered too basic for copyright protection. Hope this helped, and thanks for reaching out! Sennecaster (Chat) 17:35, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

This helped a ton, thanks! The main reason I suspect it's a good case for rewriting is that the copied text only reflects the subject's very narrow contributions to the academic programs at that single university, and the rest of the article covers a pretty impressive breadth of other accomplishments not summarized in the lede text.

From the article history, the text in question was there from the start when it was closer to a stub in length, so I suspect it's a win/win to rewrite now that more references and content have been aggregated over time on this subject. Just wanted to make sure that there was no magical step I needed to take first, to "raise the flag" on my copyright concern in the long-term provenance of article edits.

Thanks for taking the time to explain so well, you've been quite encouraging to me as a new editor and helped connect the dots on how the impressive breath and depth of policy plays out in practical terms in these situations. Take care, I hope you have a great day! Chiselinccc (talk) 18:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

For your great work in the area of copyright. Thanks so much. You are appreciated!

–Novem Linguae (talk) 14:59, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Another kitten for you!

Seconding the above - your hard work in the area of copyright cleanup is much appreciated.

Remagoxer ^(talk) 15:04, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your tireless work on CCI, where you have been an invaluable asset. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:17, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. 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.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol newsletter

Hello Sennecaster,

New Page Review article queue, March to September 2023

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter June 2023

Hello Sennecaster,

New Page Review queue April to June 2023

Backlog

Redirect drive: In response to an unusually high redirect backlog, we held a redirect backlog drive in May. The drive completed with 23851 reviews done in total, bringing the redirect backlog to 0 (momentarily). Congratulations to Hey man im josh who led with a staggering 4316 points, followed by Meena and Greyzxq with 2868 and 2546 points respectively. See this page for more details. The redirect queue is steadily rising again and is steadily approaching 4,000. Please continue to help out, even if it's only for a few or even one review a day.

Redirect autopatrol: All administrators without autopatrol have now been added to the redirect autopatrol list. If you see any users who consistently create significant amounts of good quality redirects, consider requesting redirect autopatrol for them here.

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team, consisting of Sam, Jason and Susana, and also some patches from Jon, has been hard at work updating PageTriage. They are focusing their efforts on modernising the extension's code rather than on bug fixes or new features, though some user-facing work will be prioritised. This will help make sure that this extension is not deprecated, and is easier to work on in the future. In the next month or so, we will have an opt-in beta test where new page patrollers can help test the rewrite of Special:NewPagesFeed, to help find bugs. We will post more details at WT:NPPR when we are ready for beta testers.

Articles for Creation (AFC): All new page reviewers are now automatically approved for Articles for Creation draft reviewing (you do not need to apply at WT:AFCP like was required previously). To install the AFC helper script, visit Special:Preferences, visit the Gadgets tab, tick "Yet Another AFC Helper Script", then click "Save". To find drafts to review, visit Special:NewPagesFeed, and at the top left, tick "Articles for Creation". To review a draft, visit a submitted draft, click on the "More" menu, then click "Review (AFCH)". You can also comment on and submit drafts that are unsubmitted using the script.

You can review the AFC workflow at WP:AFCR. It is up to you if you also want to mark your AFC accepts as NPP reviewed (this is allowed but optional, depends if you would like a second set of eyes on your accept). Don't forget that draftspace is optional, so moves of drafts to mainspace (even if they are not ready) should not be reverted, except possibly if there is conflict of interest.

Pro tip: Did you know that visual artists such as painters have their own SNG? The most common part of this "creative professionals" criteria that applies to artists is WP:ARTIST 4b (solo exhibition, not group exhibition, at a major museum) or 4d (being represented within the permanent collections of two museums).

Reminders

• Newsletter feedback - please take this short poll about the newsletter.
• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord and #wikimedia-npp ^connect on IRC.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

At long last

		The Copyright Barnstar
		Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/ItsLassieTime is now history. Scorpions1325 and I may have been the editors who cleaned the final article, but we stood on the shoulders of giants. Thank you for all your hard work. — SamX [talk · contribs] 03:36, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Chronica

Hi, I would ask you advice regarding your removal: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chronica_Hungarorum&diff=prev&oldid=1179894878

Firstly I would say that I respect the Wiki rules, and I would be a useful content creator who keep the rules, and in the past I did not know about this paraphrasing rule from other languages, I thought only the copyright violation is if I copy paste direct a long English text from an English book, website, etc. Which means I will be more carefuly in the future.

I bet regarding those some sentences, no one would have noticed, just there is an user who had not much contribution on the Wikipedia, just harassing and reporting many of my edits as personal revenge. It past 2 months since the copyright report, so it cannot be too serious...

I checked the rules: Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing#Translation

1. "Istanbul is a large city"
2. "The sun looms through the haze like a red omen"

The first is a simple statement of fact and should be acceptable. The second carries over the figurative expressions "looms through" and "like a red omen", so presumably is not acceptable despite using completely different words from the original.

According to my understanding, which means if I say "World War II ended in 1945" cannot be copyrigthed if any source use this sentence. Is this correct?

You removed this content:

In fact, the number of printing houses was not too high at that time. At the end of the 1470s, 66 printing houses could operate in Europe, of which two were in the Kingdom of Hungary (in Buda and Pozsony (now Bratislava))

I think this is "fact" category. Could you give me advice how can I put this info in the article in a different way? I see you are a native English speaker, so you can easier help me because I am not a native speaker.

This was the other deleted content:

The Chronica Hungarorum was created by merging several historical works. The first part is a 14th-century composition that discusses the history of the Hungarians from the earliest times to 1334. The second text unit of the Buda Chronicle contains the last times of the reign of King Charles Robert of Hungary, the events of the period between 1335 and 1342. The third part contains the history of King Louis the Great of Hungary, while the fourth unit contains the period between 1382 and 1468, describes events related to the reign of King Matthias of Hungary. This last section, whose author is unknown, that is only four pages, so the editor has condensed the events of the recent past and of his own time, which were quite exciting and twisty events, it tells the story of eight decades from the death of King Louis I (1382) to the campaign of King Matthias Corvinus in Moldavia (1468). The disproportion is conspicuous: King Albert of Habsburg (1437–1439), who reigned for barely two years, received not much less content than King Sigismund of Luxemburg (1387–1437), who reigned for half a century. King Matthias Corvinus is only mentioned in a short chapter: his coronation (1458), the recapture of Jajca (1463), the recapture of the Holy Crown of Hungary (1464), and finally the victorious Moldavian campaign. Then the chronicle ends suddenly and the Hungarian history of the last four years (1469–1473) is missing. This can be explained by the fact that the very sensitive domestic political events between 1471 and 1472 (the conspiracy, the invasion of the King Casimir IV of Poland, the captivity and death of John Vitéz) were still very recent, so it seemed wiser to remain silent about them.

That is my source text with fast translation: https://chronica.oszk.hu The Chronicle of the Hungarians was created by merging several historical works. The first part is a 14th-century composition that discusses the history of the Hungarians from the conquest to 1334. The second text unit of the Buda Chronicle contains the end of the reign of Róbert Károly, the events of the period between 1335 and 1342. The third part discusses the history of King Louis the Great, while the fourth unit, the period between 1382 and 1468, describes events related to the reign of Mátyás Hunyadi.

https://chronica.oszk.hu/a-kronikarol/ The text of the Chronica, created by merging several independent historical works, is dated 14–15. remained to us from 19th century codices. The last section of the print, whose author is unknown, tells the story of eight decades from the death of Louis I (the Great) (1382) to Matthias' campaign in Moldavia (1468). It is worth noting that there are only four pages, so the editor has condensed the events of the recent past and of his own time, which are otherwise quite exciting and twisty. The disproportion is striking: Albert of Habsburg, who reigned for barely two years, received not much less than Sigismund of Luxembourg, who reigned for half a century. Mátyas Hunyadi is only mentioned in a short chapter: his coronation (1458), the recapture of Jajca (1463), the recapture of the Holy Crown (1464), and finally the aforementioned Moldavian campaign. The Chronica ends abruptly here, the Hungarian history of the last four years (1469–1473) is missing. This can be explained by the fact that the very delicate domestic political events between 1471 and 1472 (the conspiracy, the invasion of the Polish Kázmér, the captivity and death of János Vitéz) were still very recent, so it seemed wiser to remain silent about them.

These info are also facts, how can I say different that the chronicle describe the rule of these kings? If the Harry Potter books has 7 volumes and certain characters, how can I say it different?

I would highlight this removed content, you can see basically this is just a list of historical facts, all of them have a separate Wiki articles, so I cannot understand exactly how can be copyright violation listing facts and listing Wiki articles next to each other by chronology. Btw those chapters are in the 500+ years old medieval book in the same way which cannot be copyrighted if my marked source, the public national library presented what is in the old book:

King Matthias Corvinus is only mentioned in a short chapter: his coronation (1458), the recapture of Jajca (1463), the recapture of the Holy Crown of Hungary (1464), and finally the victorious Moldavian campaign

The source in the public national Hungarian library about that medieval book, (should I ask permission from them to use their text?)

Could you give me advice how can I put these facts in the article in the proper way? Thank you your support!

OrionNimrod (talk) 10:30, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

@OrionNimrod; Acknowledging that I've seen this and will respond but I don't know if I'll have time to give an in-depth response until Sunday evening in America. Sennecaster (Chat) 11:35, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

No problem, I can wait for your help and advice! OrionNimrod (talk) 11:40, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi @OrionNimrod, I'm another user who is also active in copyright. Copyright is inherently complicated and it is very easy to misunderstand it: unfortunately, here, I think you may have misunderstood the WP:LIMITED guideline.

You are correct in that simple facts like the one you mentioned cannot be copyrighted. This is because there is no other creative way to express the same fact. Many of the sentences you have translated are written in a creative manner, and are not just simple facts. Additionally, even for those that do fall under LIMITED, you have often copied the sentence structure verbatim: the actual structure of a paragraph can also be copyrighted. Whilst facts themselves may not be copyrighted, the order they are presented in can.

You must rephrase this content in your own words. A trick often mentioned is to read the text, look away for a few minutes and write what you remember, checking after to correct your errors. Ideally, you shouldn't be translating copyrighted texts at all if they are not in your own words. On your example:

In fact, the number of printing houses was not too high at that time. At the end of the 1470s, 66 printing houses could operate in Europe, of which two were in the Kingdom of Hungary (in Buda and Pozsony (now Bratislava))

could be rephrased as:

By the 1470s, there were still only 66 printing houses in Europe, two of which were in the Hungarian districts of Buda and Pozsony.

As for your second point, if the text is in the WP:public domain, i.e. it is not copyrighted, then you may use it on Wikipedia. However, you must attribute it with a template like This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.. Content from the Hungarian National Library is copyrighted, as stated here. If you want to seek permission from them to use their text, please follow the instructions at WP:DONATETEXT.

In cleaning up this content, it would be very helpful if you could highlight where you have copied or translated from a copyrighted text, and if you could remove or rephrase the material as such. Please ask if you have any questions. – Isochrone (T) 23:03, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Isochrone, Sennecaster,

Thanks for your uselful feedback and copyright advice! I think I need practise the suggested workflow. Then I will check carefully the removed content and I rewrite the facts in my own words. By the way it is possible to ask copyedit by other users in these cases? (maybe easier to do this the native speakers)

I found an another fancy thing. Because that is an 550 years old book, there are many studies about this over the centuries, for example this is an academic source from 1900 about the book, which means it cannot be copyright because it is older than 70 years: http://real-eod.mtak.hu/8724/1/MTA_ElnokokFotitkarokMunkai_FraknoiVilmos_159882.pdf

That source say exactly the same facts as the modern sources about this book. Should I use an academic source from 1900? But we have an another wiki rule, that we need to use reliable modern secondary academic sources. If the modern text is the same as the old not anymore copyrighted one, does the modern text transfer the copyright right of the old one which expired?

For example if there is a story in an 500 years old book, and today somebody write exactly the same text and publish it, then it will be copyrighted? It means nobody can use anymore the old text? OrionNimrod (talk) 11:06, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Isochrone,

I would like to ask you advice regarding this, you removed this content [1]

"The chronicle was published twice in print in 1488 in Brno and Augsburg. The Augsburg edition had two versions, the description of the Austrian campaign is missing from which one was dedicated to the German audience. Nevertheless, two decorative copies have been preserved which were made for King Matthias of Hungary. Both were printed on parchment and the editor’s preface was made with gilded letters for the first time in history. The engravings of both volumes were painted at the Hungarian royal court."

Source text: https://corvina.hu/en/corvina/virtual-corvinas/inc1143-en/

"While the works of Ransanus and Bonfini were published first as manuscripts, and both in the royal court, we have no knowledge of such version of Thurocz’s chronicle: it was published twice in 1488 (in Brunn and Augsburg), and both times in print. The Augsburg edition had two versions of one of which – dedicated to the German audience – the description of the Austrian campaign is missing. Nevertheless, decorative copies were made for the king, of which two have been preserved: they were printed on parchment and the editor’s preface, for the first time in history, was made with gilded letters. Apparently, the engravings of both volumes were painted at the royal court. The same two illuminators worked on both volumes and shared the work the same way; besides, the hand of the more decisive master can be found in other works of the Buda workshop as well, including the Vatican Missal."

I see there are facts, like "the chronicle was published in print where and when" "the versions" "printed gilded letters for the first time in the history" "painted where". You can see I already changed many things and tried just provide only the facts from the original text. Or do you think it was ok, just it was too much similar together with the other text, because you removed a longer part of the text as my example here. Could you give me example how would you write these facts in the article? Thank you! OrionNimrod (talk) 17:11, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

@OrionNimrod It's very clear you have just rearranged some sentences and changed some words: this does not evade copyright restrictions, it is close paraphrasing. Just using Mediawiki's native text-diff comparison shows this, but here are some specific examples:

Text comparison table

Article	Source	Rephrased
The Augsburg edition had two versions, the description of the Austrian campaign is missing from which one was dedicated to the German audience.	The Augsburg edition had two versions of one of which – dedicated to the German audience – the description of the Austrian campaign is missing.	Two editions of the Augsburg edition were published: one for German readers and the other for Austrians, which is missing.
Nevertheless, decorative copies were made for the king, of which two have been preserved	Nevertheless, two decorative copies have been preserved which were made for King Matthias of Hungary.	Other preserved editions include two display copies commissioned by the King.
Both were printed on parchment and the editor’s preface was made with gilded letters for the first time in history.	...they were printed on parchment and the editor’s preface, for the first time in history, was made with gilded letters.	Gilded letters were used for the first time, and editions were printed on parchment rather than X.

I have bolded where you have just copied word for word. I understand it may be difficult to rephrase in your own words, but it is pretty clear that this is just blanket copying. Simply changing the order of sentences does not mean it is not close paraphrasing.
You will note, I have also added for each one an appropriately rephrased version. I do not have a perfect understanding of the topic, so I have still had to recycle some words, and you can see where there are very limited ways to otherwise express the source.
I think the wider problem is how you are writing: you are writing solely based on sources that you are translating, rather than making notes of such sources and integrating them more fluidly into your writing. Additionally, you don't need to write in such excessive detail: this is an easy trap that causes you to subconsciously copy from certain sources.
I understand it may be difficult to do this if you do not speak English natively, but it is imperative you understand what is and isn't close paraphrasing and how to avoid it. If you need help, I can rephrase some more, but I unfortunately cannot help you with the rest of the article. – Isochrone (T) 22:22, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

I echo what Isochrone has so kindly written while I sort out IRL obligations; when translated, there is only rearrangement of the same words as the text. Neither Isochrone nor I natively speak Hungarian, so we are relying heavily on Google Translate and the likes to evaluate this. If I go specifically with In fact, the number of printing houses was not too high at that time. At the end of the 1470s, 66 printing houses could operate in Europe, of which two were in the Kingdom of Hungary (in Buda and Pozsony (now Bratislava)), the example you provided, there are more artistic licenses taken with these sentences of what WP:LIMITED suggests. Something that would fall under WP:LIMITED is "By the end of the 1470s, there were 66 printing houses, 2 in the Kingdom of Hungary.", because there is no way to reword the sentence without losing conciseness.

I think another thing that would help, as like what Iso is saying, is explained in the essay about close paraphrasing. You quoted the statement about translations, but I think the more you translate and the more closely you translate, the more likely you are to create a copyright problem is also useful to keep in mind. Overall, the more a source is used, the chance of a copyright violation is higher, and directly translating will almost always lead to problems like in Chronica. Sennecaster (Chat) 22:36, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Isochrone, Sennecaster, thank you your kind and useful feedback!

I think I can learn that workflow to improve the quality of my Wikipedia contribution. I always use reliable academic sources, sometimes I had content dispute if I did not follow exactly the language of the sources because I did not want copyright issue. I understand now, reading the source, I can focus on the facts and I can provide those fact by my own words. OrionNimrod (talk) 10:03, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

November Articles for creation backlog drive

Hello Sennecaster:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 2500 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Preston Smith copyright issues

can you please help me understand why this article was heavily revised based on copyright issues? the article is now missing important facts. thanks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Preston_Smith_%28governor%29&diff=1142204953&oldid=1140528672&variant=en Ccirulli (talk) 19:44, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ccirulli: This was removed on grounds of presumptive deletion; much of the content that this user added had poor sources, copyright violations, fully offline sources, or were straight up SYNTH, BLP, or self-citing violations. The poor quality of writing, the mass copyright violations, and overall time sink led presumptive removal being used on almost all of this user's work, especially since he was an active LTA for years and much of what was removed from later pages was his sock content too. I have no objections if someone properly takes the sources and rewrites the content without just paraphrasing what Billy wrote. Furthermore, I would be very cautious in the future about labeling edits as vandalism, especially ones with clear reasoning, as other people may take that as a sign of assuming bad faith. Feel free to reach out with further questions on the matter. Sennecaster (Chat) 15:15, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

Hello Sennecaster: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:32, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:32, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Holiday Greetings

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, people's rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. Hope all is well in your corner of WikiWorld! I revisted my history recently (at WP) and remember fondly your copyright repair. It put me over the moon. Still does! ―Buster7 ☎

Concern regarding Draft:Susan King (politician)

Hello, Sennecaster. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Susan King (politician), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:10, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

New pages patrol January 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, 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. Each review will earn 1 point. 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.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

March 2024 GAN backlog drive

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

George Frederik Willem Borel

Thanks for dealing with this listing at CP. Just an fyi, the original nlwiki article was deleted for plagiarism and pov, not copyvio, since the book is PD already. I asked the deleting admin a few months ago at nl:Overleg_gebruiker:Natuur12#George_Frederik_Willem_Borel. Thanks. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 02:09, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

@ARandomName123; thanks, converted to PD attribution. POV isn't something I can assess myself as I can't read Dutch. Sennecaster (Chat) 02:17, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

Hello Sennecaster,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, 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. Each review will earn 1 point. 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.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Albert Pearson Stewart Copyright Status

Hi, I wanted to ask if the Albert Pearson Stewart page is going to be assessed? The director of Purdue Musical Organizations, William Griffel, submitted permission to use material from Bennet's Boilermaker Music Makers book to the permissions-en@wikimedia.org email address. Even if the photos from the book are not permitted, can I edit the page and remove them? I am concerned that the page is relegated to a copyright limbo of sorts, and I would like to see it finished. Thanks! CusterDome (talk) 16:05, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

@CusterDome; the VRT ticket is waiting on volunteer response currently. I cannot share the details of the ticket, but I personally do not feel comfortable handling it. To answer your question; unfortunately, it is in a state of limbo about the text, but you can edit the page to remove the photos. Additionally, rewriting the text presumptively would clear up the copyright status definitively as we can ensure it isn't directly copied. The photos might take a while, but CPN does not deal with file issues overall so it will be bounced to Commons in its own time. Feel free to ask for additional clarification or questions, and thank you for reaching out. :) Sennecaster (Chat) 16:15, 22 April 2024 (UTC)