User talk:Tomcat7/2011/March
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The Signpost: 28 February 2011
- News and notes: Newbies vs. patrollers; Indian statistics; brief news
- Arbitration statistics: Arbitration Committee hearing fewer cases; longer decision times
- WikiProject report: In Tune with WikiProject Classical Music
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: AUSC applications open; interim desysopping; two pending cases
- Technology report: HTML5 adopted but soon reverted; brief news
Hi GreatOrangePumpkin, can you revisit the above FLC when you get the chance? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:53, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Copyvio
Yes, we get the message, you're not happy that Aruba at the Summer Olympics 2008 was delisted from GA status. But do not attempt to address this by (1) adding irrelevant material (Aruba Networks has nothing to do with Aruba) or (2) by introducing copyvio - the section you added was virtually identical to text from this. Copyright violations can lead to blocks, so please don't do this again. Regards, BencherliteTalk 13:10, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi G.O.P. I think all your concerns had been adressed on the nomination, would you be kind enough to take a look at it? Thanks. Jaespinoza (talk) 20:07, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi GreatOrangePumpkin! I have nominated the above article ("Irresistible (Jessica Simpson song)") for an FA. Feel free to check it out. Thanks! — Novice7 (talk) 17:40, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
GAR
Good article reassessment for Lula 3D
Lula 3D has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. KnowIG (talk) 22:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Non-free files in your user space
Hey there GreatOrangePumpkin, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:GreatOrangePumpkin/Sandbox16. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.
- See a log of files removed today here.
- Shut off the bot here.
- Report errors here.
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Outdoor Sport Channel, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.outdoorsportchannel-globalwide.com.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.
If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:35, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Outdoor Sports Channel - massive copyvio
| Details of copyvio |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
From the article (1):
From the source here
From the article (2)
From the source
From the article (3)
From the source
From the article (4)
From the source
From the article (5)
From the source
From the article (6)
From the source
|
This was a massive copyvio, so I deleted it. The source has a copyright notice at the bottom of the webpage, unsurprisingly. Quite how you could say that the source was not copyrighted I have no idea. Please consider this your final warning on copyright violations. Any further instances are likely to see you be blocked for Wikipedia's protection. BencherliteTalk 14:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 7 March 2011
- News and notes: Foundation looking for "storyteller" and research fellows; new GLAM newsletter; brief news
- Deletion controversy: Deletion of article about website angers gaming community
- WikiProject report: Talking with WikiProject Feminism
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: New case opened after interim desysop last week; three pending cases
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
WikiProject Wikify's March Mini Drive
|
WikiProject Wikify's March Mini! Hello, I thought you would be interested in the March Mini, a coordinated effort by WikiProject Wikify members to eliminate the 2008 backlog of articles tagged with {{wikify}} and/or {{dead end}}. Come join in the fun! There are only three prizes to be won, including a special barnstar created just for this drive! Regards, |
 |
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 04:03, 9 March 2011 (UTC).
Copyvio continued
You wrote: "I was trying to remove some POV context from the site and tried to make it as tiny as possible. I don't know else how to write articles, if only one website has great information about it. How can I write then? It is the official website, and this stupid copyright disturbs to write a normal article. What do you think, how I should write such articles? Or should I simple not create articles, if the sources are copyrighted? I just added all useful information, exactly how I could write an article about a channel."
Answer: I'm surprised by your reply, since it shows a basic lack of understanding about how to write articles and the nature of copyright. You don't write articles by copying a website and removing the odd word of advertising. To start with, you ought to be looking for reliable sources about the channel, rather than regurgitating material from the channel's website - that would show that it's notable. Perhaps you need to go back to basics and try reading WP:Your first article, WP:Copy-paste WP:N, WP:RS and WP:COPYVIO. In the meantime, until you know what the rules are, steer clear of writing brand-new articles, please. Oh, and in future, don't remove copyright warning notices from articles with an edit summary saying that the material isn't copyrighted unless there's clear evidence that the text is not under copyright. If you had looked properly, you would have seen the copyright notice at the bottom of the page. BencherliteTalk 12:12, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Cut and move
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.
In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. --♫Greatorangepumpkin♫T 17:32, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
The Signpost: 14 March 2011
- News and notes: Foundation reports editor trends, technology plans and communication changes; brief news
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: New case on AE sanction handling; AUSC candidates; proposed decision in Kehrli 2 and Monty Hall problem
- Technology report: Left-aligned edit links and bugfixes abound; brief news
CSD notification
The page Pilotwings Wii looks like it may be a valid CSD, but I prefer not to delete a page unless the creator has been notified. I understand that sometimes automated tools fail to do the notification for some reason. Not sure if that was the case, but could you make the notification?SPhilbrickT 13:43, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
New page patrol
Hi GreatOrangePumpkin. Thanks for patrolling new pages. I have deleted Anish Venkatesh Bindlish as A1, not G1, as you had templated it - there is a big difference. We are currently on a drive to improve the quality of New Page Patrolling - you can help. Please review the criteria at WP:CSD, and check out WP:NPP for up to date instructions on page patrolling, and most importantly, don't hesitate to ask me for help if you are still not clear about deletion criteria. Kudpung (talk) 13:56, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Svetlana Kuznetsova
The article Svetlana Kuznetsova you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Svetlana Kuznetsova for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:16, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Copyright problem: Svetlana Kuznetsova
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Svetlana Kuznetsova, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://svetlanakuznetsova.ru/en/biography-en, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:
- If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Svetlana Kuznetsova and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Svetlana Kuznetsova, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
- If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Svetlana Kuznetsova with a link to where we can find that note.
- If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Svetlana Kuznetsova. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Svetlana Kuznetsova saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Jezhotwells (talk) 13:21, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
- No, virtually the entire career section, year by year remains a copy-vio. I notice that you removed the copy-vio template. I have replaced it, do not remove it again, please read the instructions there about editing on a temporary page until this is resolved by admins. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:34, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
FLC review
You have reviewed Philadelphia Phillies all-time roster (E) at WP:FLC. Demands by opposers at that nomination have resulted in a merge. I am asking all commenters to return to the FLC page and re-review if time is available. I appreciate your help and apologize for the inconvenience this has caused you. — KV5 • Talk • 22:33, 20 March 2011 (UTC)