User talk: Diannaa

 Skip to the bottom  ⇩  ·

Murugan

I am just expanding and improving the article Murugan in order to make it a good article on Wikipedia by removing the redirect and typos in it and adding good and accurate content there but you are reverting my good faith edits always. I am telling you to not revert them for this reason and let me improve and expand that article. 2409:4072:58F:337A:D8FA:F659:D54E:5CD4 (talk) 12:13, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

The content you added appears to have been copied from another website. You can't do that; it's a violation of our copyright policy. — Diannaa (talk) 12:25, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

When you know that it is the only problem in it, remove all the copyrighted text alone and leave all the other remaining own written text alone it that, so that other editors can improve and correct that Murugan article now into a good article instead of removing all content in that article and corrupting it also, so please revert your revert now as they are legitimate edits only. 120.56.171.3 (talk) 17:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

That was not possible. It was a 97 percent overlap. — Diannaa (talk) 19:44, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Copyright Infringement Claim

The draft Draft:Aubrey Milunsky, MD DSc FRCP FACMG DCH was deleted on 18 Jun 2024, due to a copyright infrigement. However, the link that was provided was a bio about the same person, that Dr. Aubrey Milunsky helped prepare himself. I tried to write a similar bio for him, and I believe that is why it was deleted. Is there a way to bring back this draft to be edited again, and how can I change it so that it will be accepted? 50.198.77.241 (talk) 15:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder or have their permission, unless special documentation is in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

Sorry but I cannot restore the draft, as Wikipedia cannot host copyright material, not even temporarily for editing, not even in sandboxes or drafts.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 19:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you...

for your removal of plagiarism from the Vineyard Theatre article. Are you a part of some formal plagiarism-checking unit here? (I would enlist.) 98.206.30.195 (talk) 18:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for your interest in copyright cleanup. Our copyright detection service, like everything at Wikipedia, is done on a volunteer basis, not in a formal way. The particular task I undertake daily requires me to have an account, and it's helpful but not mandatory to be an administrator as well. — Diannaa (talk) 19:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

False flagging

Hi Diannaa,

I have responded to your message on my talk page but wanted to reinforce that the revert on Clinical trial on grounds of copyright violation was completely in the wrong. I understand from your other responses here that there are only 3 volunteers in the anti-plagiarism unit; however, the website you linked (which I have never seen before) starts off by saying FDA issued a draft guidance. Public-facing FDA material is in the public domain and therefore not copyrighted, unless noted otherwise. Perhaps, Earwig's tool somehow incorrectly flagged my edits but nevertheless, the original material was in the public domain, so I ask that you undo the removal—I can't even see what my edits were, so I can't put them back myself. Motjustescribe (talk) 22:11, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

@Motjustescribe, if you could please provide me with th url where you found the content on the FDA website I will restore the material. Thanks. — Diannaa (talk) 23:05, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa,

Thanks for your prompt response and I forgot to thank you for your thankless job of cleaning up potential copyright infringements—thank you. Please see Introduction on Page 1 of https://www.fda.gov/media/174976/download (or click on the "Download the Draft Guidance Document" button here). You should find the glossary containing definitions of the different kinds of clinical trials that might need a master protocol. Motjustescribe (talk) 23:23, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I see that on your talk page you did say where you got the content. In the future, could you please add a citation? If you had done so I would very likely not have made this mistake. Sorry for the mistake. I have gone ahead and restored the content along with the required citation.

In the future, please add attribution when copying from public domain sources: simply add the template {{source-attribution}} after your citation. I have done so for this article. Please do this in the future so that our readers will be aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself, and that it's okay to copy verbatim. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 23:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I will remember that—I'm still learning about the many features of Wikipedia, so thank you for letting me know. Motjustescribe (talk) 23:26, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Texas State Historical Association

I reverted and revdeleted at Wayside, Armstrong County, Texas because of a verbatim copy from the Association. I then took a look at the editor who introduced the violation, and it appears to me that they may be doing that on other pages. For example, the History section of Sparenberg, Texas copies from here, although this time it's close paraphrasing rather than an actual copy. My primary question is whether the Association is claiming a copyright on the material; secondarily, if the material is in fact copyrighted, is the close paraphrasing in this particular example sufficiently close to remove it? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:03, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi Bbb23. That's a good question. Their website is marked as Copyright © 2024 and their terms of use page sayss that commercial use of the material is not allowed without prior permission, so we can't copy from there.

Regarding the article on Sparenberg, they have paraphrased it adequately in my opinion. — Diannaa (talk) 19:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Diannaa!--Bbb23 (talk) 20:16, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Probable copyvio close paraphrasing?

Hello Diannaa. Is List of creepypastas#Squidward's Suicide (Red Mist) a possible copyvio of this article? It may have been paraphrased but I noticed parts of it being "close paraphrasing" not enough to not be considered as "plagiarism". Regards, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:27, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi JWilz12345. That's a good question. Earwig's tool shows too much overlap. The paragraph will have to be re-written, or it will have to come out. — Diannaa (talk) 02:38, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject

Hi, I see you've contributed a lot to Persian mythology, would you maybe be interested in a taskforce on oral tradition? Kowal2701 (talk) 15:55, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have time to participate in that. — Diannaa (talk) 16:00, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

No worries Kowal2701 (talk) 16:01, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Note

Thought you might want to be made aware of this personal attack. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 18:28, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

I of course saw that, and am giving it all the attention it deserves — Diannaa (talk) 20:25, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Battle of the Jabara Valley Copyright removal

Hey, just saw the copyright deletion, and it was probably necessary. Just a few of questions and notes:

• Would it make the content OK to write if I extensively paraphrase it (as much as I can)?
• Can I view the old writing again to fix and paraphrase it?
• I believe you also deleted some content cited from Anadolu Agency and the Brussels Times. I'm quite sure they weren't violating copyright, considering that content from those news agencies has already been used on Wikipedia multiple times. (I just thought something might have already proven a permission for usage from them, because they were used on several pages.)
• In case the content from Anadolu Agency and Brussels Times is actually copyrighted and we have no permission to use them, some content from some other pages might also have to be removed, probably more in relation to Turkey and Belgium.
• What portion of the source https://jabara.istopthearmstrade.eu/ would be small enough to copy? Maybe an estimate?

Viral weirdo (talk) 23:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

• All content you add to Wikipedia needs to be written in your own words.
• I removed the whole paragraph because almost all of it was copied from https://jabara.istopthearmstrade.eu/. The only parts not from that source were the two sentences "Belgium was arguably the main exporter" and "Investigations proved this to be false." I had to remove that content, because those two sentences when put together convey the opposite meaning of what you were trying to convey. I did not check to see if they were copied from your sources.
• You shouldn't copy any portion of your source documents into Wikipedia. Everything you add here needs to be written in your own words please. Summarize, don't paraphrase. — Diannaa (talk) 11:38, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Cost And Management Accountant (India)

Hello Dianaa,

I was interested in adding the latest data and curriculum pattern of CMA. Yes, it's a course so mostly the data was similar/same to college prospectus.

If you think its copied, then I can write in my own word because the whole content seems incomplete. Avik Ian (talk) 02:28, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

A lot of it was copied from this prospectus. Regardless, Wikipedia is not the place to give people such overly-detailed information about the eligibility requirements and curriculum. — Diannaa (talk) 03:48, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

okay, got it. Thank you, will take care of such overly detailed content in future. Avik Ian (talk) 10:40, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Can you check page Bioregion?

HI Diannaa,

Would you be able to check and review the revision history of the Bioregion wikipedia page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioregion

There is a user Karl BB who has made a lot of very specific changes and edits, including removing large chunks of what had been added. He's deleted a lot of cited material and is not maintaining a neutral view: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view

In addition, he seems to be gatekeeping the article, and monitoring for any new additions or changes.

He's the director for one planet, https://www.oneearth.org/contributor/karl-burkart/ Karl Burkart https://www.oneearth.org/what-is-a-bioregion/ which is promoting a very specific definition of bioregion, which excludes a lot of other definitions.

Otherwise - I can go back and just try to review and add back in what I think could also still be included, and which was cited and sourced.

Your opinion about best way to move forward is appreciated.

User:KarlBB CascadiaWikimedian (talk) 19:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry I don't have time to help with this. I am busy working on copyright cleanup as well as real-life things. Perhaps there's interested people at one of the wikiprojects listed on the article talk page that might be able to help you?. — Diannaa (talk) 22:20, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

You should also have a look at the material already on the talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 22:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Will do. CascadiaWikimedian (talk) 03:23, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Possible copyright violations but...

Between the article Alice White and the Hollywood Walk of Fame Alice White blurb.
I ran Earwig's copyvio tool and got a 68% chance of violations between the two.
Now, the problem is that I can't figure out when the Walk of Fame's content was written. I thought the Alice White Wikipedia article content dated back to at least April of 2010 but it's actually older, September of 2004. I didn't want to slap a copyvio template on the Wikipedia article when it appears that the Walk of Fame is the one that actually copied - as, of course they can - but what about some attribution to WP... Anyway, am asking you to please take a look and see if you can suss out which text was written when. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:10, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Shearonink. That's a very good question. Steps you can take include checking how far back the Wayback Machine has an archived copy. In this case the oldest archived version is dated Feb 18, 2014. At which point we already had this content. Your suspicion that they copied from us is supported by the fact they are using the photo we had in the info box at that time, and the remainder is pretty much identical as well. Digging back in the history, I see that the article was created by Rossrs, who was a good guy and a FA-level contributor. The odds that he copied that material from elsewhere are vanishingly small, so I would say we are in the clear from a copyright point of view. Something you can do: add a Template:Backwards copy to the article talk page to alert others about it. Thanks — Diannaa (talk) 15:39, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Just placed that Template on the article talk. Shearonink (talk) 18:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

copyright violation at Conservative Partnership Institute

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! There are snippets of copied content throughout the flagged section. Please remove or re-write. It's okay to leave in the quotations.

I've gone to some trouble to eliminate in the CPI article the exact wording used in the NYer article. Is there anyway you can narrow down what needs to be eliminated as a copyright violation? --Louis P. Boog (talk) 21:17, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

You can view the overlap using Earwig's tool. — Diannaa (talk) 21:41, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

please check copyvios.toolforge and rewrite --Louis P. Boog (talk) 02:11, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

I will look tomorrow. Thanks for quickly taking care of this. — Diannaa (talk) 02:42, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Liverpool City Region Combined Authority Copyright

Hi You removed my edit from the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority page referring to board and committees, for copyright infringement, the descriptions of the functions of the LCRCA committees and boards are public information https://liverpoolcityregion-ca.moderngov.co.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=67945 from this PDF, under pursuant to the British Government's OGL 3.0 and information stated by the combined authority in the Privacy Policy the information can be copied for non commercial informative use, while i acknowledge that is should have stated something along the lines of "according to the combined authority:" I simply forgot to add this due to the time I made this edit. I do not believe it would infringe on the Open Government Licence v3 copyright standards if I would add the source as a reference., all the best Knowledgework69 (talk) 17:01, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Also just a quick note, the description's are taken directly from the an amendment to the Liverpool City Region constitution (a public document) therefore I would argue it would be improper to paraphrase verses from the constitution. Knowledgework69 (talk) 17:05, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi Knowledgework69. I don't see any evidence that the documents are released under the Open Government License. If they were, it would say so somewhere on the document, or failing that, somewhere on their website. I did check the Liverpool City Region website and it is marked as copyright. Publicly available documents are not always in the public domain. It's not the same thing. — Diannaa (talk) 17:17, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi no worries if I can direct you to this page https://www.liverpoolcityregion-ca.gov.uk/privacy-policy in which under copyright policy it states "All content is available under the Open Government Licence, except where otherwise stated" also due to its nature of being a public record pertaining to governance it does not fall under the exemptions of OGL outlined in https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/re-using-public-sector-information/uk-government-licensing-framework/open-government-licence/exceptions-to-ogl/. therefore it is able to be copied and redistributed as long as it is stated that is the work of the combined authority. yet again i apologies i should've placed a note on the section detailing that it is from the LCRCA Constitution amendment of 2024. Knowledgework69 (talk) 19:04, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

You also should have cited your source. I am repairing the page now. Please stay off — Diannaa (talk) 19:37, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Finished. Note I included this message as part of the citations: " Text was copied from this source, which is available under an Open Government Licence v3.0. © Crown copyright." You have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. It's also required under the terms of the license.

There's also a template {{OGL-attribution}} but I have never found it to be very useful for inline use. — Diannaa (talk) 19:53, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Alright will do in future, many thanks Knowledgework69 (talk) 20:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

Charlotte Deans

Hi, I have just trimmed the article, as it seemed to be a close paraphrase of the Biographical Dictionary of Scottish Women article. See Earwig report Does the earlier version need to be revision deleted? I did not warn the author as they have not edited since a discussion of copyright violation in 2022. TSventon (talk) 20:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I have gone ahead with revision deletion. Also, I cleared the same content from User:OdaraM/Sandbox6. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa (talk) 20:24, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for all your hard work

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I just noticed you crossed 120,000 mark for closed cases on Copypatrol. That's incredible! Thank you for your incessant hard work. You are a hero! NKohli (WMF) (talk) 14:23, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar Niharika! — Diannaa (talk) 18:57, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!

I just wanted to thank you for the citation that you added to the Mende article; since I was using my own book to create the reference, it didn't even cross my mind to cite myself, ha ha. But it makes sense of course! I've edited 20 African language articles so far, adding oral literature citations, and when I actually use a paragraph from my African Folktale bibliography book, like I did for this Mende article, I need to remember to cite myself. Thanks again! Laurakgibbs (talk) 14:50, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Copyright violation

Hi Di, could you take a look at this edit, [1] which appears to be copied in part at least from [2]. It may need a rev/del. I have left a message for the user. Many thanks, Knitsey (talk) 18:16, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

Revision deletion complete. Some content was apparently copied from Murderpedia as well. Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa (talk) 19:03, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

I only got as far as checking the first part and felt it was enough to report. I was lazy and didn't check the rest 😳

Thanks for checking. Knitsey (talk) 19:07, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 220, August 2024

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at two works on logistics and one on the Battle of Arnhem

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:17, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2024

• In the media: Portland pol profile paid for from public purse

• Recent research: STORM: AI agents role-play as "Wikipedia editors" and "experts" to create Wikipedia-like articles, a more sophisticated effort than previous auto-generation systems

• In focus: Twitter marks the spot

• News and notes: Another Wikimania has concluded

• Special report: Nano or just nothing: Will nano go nuclear?

• Opinion: HouseBlaster's RfA debriefing

• Traffic report: Ball games, movies, elections, but nothing really weird

• Humour: I'm proud to be a template

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:47, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Copyright violation?

Is it alright to ad longer quotes from sources in the refs like here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Golan_Heights&diff=1240532808&oldid=1240532455

Ill remove it if its not. Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 03:45, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

Quotes inside citations are allowed. It's not a copyright violation, but unneeded or excessive quotation can be a violation of the non-free content guideline. Whether I remove quotations, especially lengthy ones or what strikes me as excessive, depends on the topic and on the accessibility of the source and on whether or not the material is likely to be challenged. A judgement call. WP:FOOTQUOTE — Diannaa (talk) 13:07, 16 August 2024 (UTC)