User talk:Diannaa/Archive 84

Dear Diannaa, Sorry to bring up something you dealt with more than a year ago. Working through the CAT:AFDMERGE backlog, I encountered Battle of Kakkor, into which I should merge its content fork, Battle of Kakor (1759). I am trying to figure out what is up with the copyright situation. It seems like several versions were rev'delled in April 2021 as a copyvio of this book,^[1] but now the article claims that very source to be in public domain. Could you perhaps shed some light on this?

Felix QW (talk) 18:39, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Felix QW, that's a very good question. At the time of the publication of the book in India in 1939, the applicable legislation was The Indian Copyright Act, 1914, which provided copyright protection for 50 years from the date of death of the author. Since we don't know his date of death, we don't know if the copyright protection was still in effect on the URAA restoration date (1 January 1996). Looking at the Commons:Hirtle chart, we see that for works published from 1927 through 1977, they are protected for 95 years from publication (2034 in this instance), unless they were in the public domain on the URAA date. If we knew the date of the author's death, we might be able to say with certainty that the book was in the public domain on the URAA date, but since we don't know what year he died, I decided to err on the side of caution and assume the book is not yet in the public domain. — Diannaa (talk) 19:10, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Felix QW. I have now done some spot checks and found nothing copied from the book in Battle of Kakkor. I don't know why I added the PD template; there was no CopyPatrol report in October, just the one in April. I have removed the template.

Checking Battle of Kakor (1759) I find that everything is copied from this book published in 1984. There's nothing left for you to merge. — Diannaa (talk) 19:45, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Dear Diannaa,

Thank you so much for your prompt and very thorough response, and for your decisive action! Felix QW (talk) 15:22, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I did what you rightly pointed out to me, in the page Maritime republics.--Giorgio Eusebio Petetti (talk) 08:16, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

You need to specify which articles, like I did here. — Diannaa (talk) 13:22, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

It is wonderful that you were able to locate a published source for information that I shared. In the future, please help to update Wikipedia by simply adding citations you become aware of. SalishSea098 (talk) 18:24, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi SalishSea098. It seems you missed the point of my visit to your talk page, which was to tell you that when you add public domain content to Wikipedia, you need to provide attribution. In the future, please add attribution when copying from public domain sources: simply add the template {{PD-notice}} after your citation. I have done so for the above 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) 18:30, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

Your assumption is incorrect. Again, thanks for adding the reference you found to Wikipedia. SalishSea098 (talk) 18:36, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I have deleted an obvious copyvio of this source at Jacquard loom , introduced on 9 June 2022 by User:Jeeeesss with this edit. I suppose everything since then has to be redacted. Don't know why I didn't see it before. John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:50, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for reporting. — Diannaa (talk) 13:40, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

For the page Special_operations user Melbguy05 has come in twice and reverted the majority of the article, as they do not believe the content fits the page. They do not appear to be adding any content to the page besides doing reversions of edits. I believe the current content fits the intended purpose of the page. As an admin and member of the WikiProject Military history would you be willing to check the content of the article? The article does need a substantial amount of expansion. KeepItGoingForward (talk) 04:36, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry I don't have time to help with this. You could try using the article's talk page or discussing with the user who removed your additions. — Diannaa (talk) 12:50, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, I was looking for sources for the Pratt & Whitney GG4 article, and found a good one. Unfortunately, the article is a close paraphrase at best, with much of it being a direct copyvio of the source. I.wrote most of the lead sentence, but the rest probably needs to be deleted. If you can keep the ref with that sentence, that would be good. I can use the original source to rebuilt the article, but as paraphrasing is very difficult for me, I can't do it tonight. Thanks for whatsoever you can care do. BilCat (talk) 02:11, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and removed the offending text, and added a revdel tag for the preceding versions. I should have just done that, but my brain wasn't in gear! Sorry. BilCat (talk) 02:47, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Another admin has deleted it, so you don't have to do anything. BilCat (talk) 09:38, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks BilCat. It's nice when the work carries on while I am resting — Diannaa (talk) 13:16, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Please stop removing content that I wrote for the clubs website that I would like to display on Wiki, especially the close link with the royal family after the recent events.

This is my copy when I created the website, all words are mine and mine alone. Mspallan (talk) 08:57, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

In order to protect the rights of copyright holders, we can't take your word for it that you are the copyright holder. You need to release the content under a compatible license, using the procedure that Wikipedia has in place for this purpose. (Providing licensing info in your edit summary is inadequate.) Once the permission email is received and processed, the content can be restored. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 13:15, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Dear Diannaa,

I'd like to bring to your attention the last line in this section Max Valier Memorials. On 22 Oct 2021, a contributor called Trollinger added what seems to be offensive language written in some kind of German slang. At your discretion, could you edit it out?

Thanks! Harpo (talk) 18:56, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

No. It appears to be a quotation from this Twitter post — Diannaa (talk) 19:01, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification! Following your reply I searched and even found videos where the message is decoded. The message is looped so other people quote it beginning at a different place.

I was confused in that this piece of info is hidden in a list item in the memorials and up to the reader to infer that it is the decoded morse code, and not even mentioned at all in the dedicated wikipedia entry for the satellite itself.

My apologies for bothering you. Have a good one! Harpo (talk) 04:45, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for catching both the copyvio and that is was a duplicate draft. Sneaky! S0091 (talk) 20:20, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Both copies of the draft were listed at CopyPatrol, that's how I spotted it. — Diannaa (talk) 02:37, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

I didn't know CopyPatrol existed so good to know. Thank again. S0091 (talk) 14:17, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa,

Following the msg that you left in my talk page, I was wondering if you could give me tips re: the attribution process with you for future practice.

Since the first "Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution" (first request), I had received on March 2022, I have been using something along those lines: "copied content from [page name]; see that page's history for attribution" when I would copy content from another Wikipedia page to another since it was the example given.

When I created the page for Ji Li (ceremony), I wrote "content which is specific to Ji Li (and unrelated to Guan Li) will be moved from the page Guan Li, see page for attributions." as a way to put a minimum attribution. I was wondering if those lines could be still used but in past tense (I just realized that I did not used the proper tenses: I meant to write "was" instead of "will be moved"). Or if I should use something more in your lines: "Attribution: text was copied from Guan Li", on September 7, 2022. Please see the history of that page for full attribution"; would "full attribution" a better practice that content was copied and/or moved... Gyuligula2 (talk) 15:16, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Gyuligula2. Your attribution statement was actually pretty good; the problem is that I didn't understand it properly (my fault for not reading it thoroughly). Sorry for the mistake. It might be best to use the shorter recommended wording to avoid confusion: Copied [or moved] content from [[<page name>]]; see that page's history for attribution. — Diannaa (talk) 15:45, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Ouroboros update. Hi Just wondering why you deleted my addition to the Ouroboros page? David — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Highfield (talk • contribs) 08:52, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

I found you had copied some copyright material from copyright content copied from https://books.google.ca/books?id=76jODwAAQBAJ&pg=PA158 and https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1703377/m2/1/high_res_d/DAILEY-DISSERTATION-2020.pdf page 358. Please don't add copyright text to Wikipedia. Please see the message on your talk page for more information on how copyright applies to Wikipedia editing. — Diannaa (talk) 12:01, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

OK. I have tidied this. Hopefully it is OK now? Thank you for your guidance. David Highfield (talk) 08:55, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

You added a Creative Commons comment to my Reference #4 in the Donkey_vote article. The referenced document includes a Creative Commons statement which I had missed. The article does not quote from that document as the Victorian Electoral Commission did not include any analysis of Donkey Votes for the elections i.e. the VEC is silent on Donkey Votes and that is the reason for the reference. Do you still have to put the Creative Commons statement when no text is quoted?

On the Talk:Donkey_vote page I added the 'Victorian Local Govenment Elections and Format Variations of Donkey Votes' section. Because this is original research it can not appear on the Donkey_vote page. In this expanded section I have the same information that the Victorian Electroal Commission fails to discuss Donkey Votes in their reports to parliament. In this case I failed to provide the reference to the document. As it is a Talk page do I need to provide references to that depth? If I'm not quoting text from the document on the Talk page do I still need the Creative Commons statement? Pdp11.caps11 (talk) 18:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

The license statement should have been attached to citation #5. Sorry for the mistake. Regarding your article talk page post, why are you posting original research, even if it's on a talk page? Original research does not belong on Wikipedia, even on talk pages. Talk pages are for discussing potential improvements to Wikipedia, not for posting theories or research. — Diannaa (talk) 18:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. I just did a whole lot of copyediting on Amiel Courtin-Wilson and published before thinking to check the copyvio detector, which found 89.9% likelihood with this page. It seems as if this version needs restoring and FloodRH21 (who appears to have COI, as Flood Projects is "a production company and art collective founded by filmmaker and artist Amiel Courtin-Wilson") needs a warning, but I thought I'd better let you know because I assume the offending comment needs to be hidden from future view. Would you please deal with this? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 09:16, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Laterthanyouthink. The copied content was added all at once in December 2021 with this edit. I am going to remove quite a bit of content to clean the copyright issue. Sorry you spent so much time working on the copy edit. Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa (talk) 12:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Diannaa. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 00:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you - I tried cleaning these up myself, but I kept getting blocked by filters. Annanathletic2010 (talk · contribs) has been copy/pasting from sabre-roads.org.uk onto the talk pages of several redirects (Talk:A713 road, Talk:A713 road (Great Britain)), apparently in attempts to create articles. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:51, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Sabre-roads wiki does not appear to be compatibly licensed. I have deleted the two talk pages involved and notified the user (via Twinkle). Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa (talk) 14:28, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response, and for all the anti-copyvio work you do!   199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I (Hog Farm) didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, you seem to have removed huge chunks of this article, even where nothing to do with copyright. For example the addition of a "further reading" section, my last edit. Why was that deleted? Copyright issues surely only arise where no credit is given to the source? For all my direct quotations, I am pretty sure that I specified the sources in the reference (if not that is an oversight easily corrected). Please will you check again and discuss which of the deleted edits you consider to be breaches of policy.

I used as one of my sources a Phd thesis (MacDonald), which is allowable under WP guidelines on sources ("Completed dissertations or theses written as part of the requirements for a doctorate, and which are publicly available can be used ..." Wikipedia:Reliable sources). But you deleted it all, even though there were no direct quotations (as far as I remember). It's a valid source.

Whole important sections, e.e "Lyon" and "Boynton" have been deleted, why? Valid sources were used. Please restore. You seem to have deleted knowledge and facts, which are not subject to copyright ("sweat of brow" (i.e. discovery of facts) is not subject to copyright) not coprighted text. 212.104.155.43 (talk) 09:58, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

The only thing I removed was a short paragraph, I removed it by mistake, as I did not see the quotation marks. Sorry for the mistake. I have now restored it. — Diannaa (talk) 11:57, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

I received a warning that I had added copyrighted material to my page. Would you be able to provide me with more specifics so I can change them and avoid making this mistake again?

Thanks! BubbaAddler (talk) 01:46, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

The content that was removed matched the prose found here. The same prose is visible at Facebook and was at SoundCloud at one point too. — Diannaa (talk) 02:40, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Diannaa, I accepted the removal of copy-paste contents from JSTOR in the Ethiopian Revolution, but it is not right for revision deletion in case of these content. Indeed, I write in my own words and not copy-pasted from JSTOR. I want to return the entire sentences you deleted and rewrite in my word if you think is offensive. The Supermind (talk) 06:53, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Sorry I but I carefully checked your addition against the source article, and the content was only lightly paraphrased, presenting the same content in the same order using almost identical wording. That's a violation of our copyright policy. Please don't re-add it or I will have to block you from editing. — Diannaa (talk) 11:04, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Here is a sample comparison of what I found. This is only an example; there was more. Overlapping prose is marked in bold. — Diannaa (talk) 11:36, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Journal article:

The students gave the wide-spread discontent a revolutionary objective and became the main force against the ruling system. On 18 February 1974, they again organized demonstrations and were again joined by the teachers, workers, taxi drivers, white-collar workers and thousands of the unemployed. Thereafter, a wave of demonstrations started in Addis Ababa.

Your version:

Students were widespread in the revolutionary system and became the main force against the ruling system. On 18 February 1974, students again organized demonstrations and joined by teachers, workers, taxi drivers, white-collar workers and thousands of unemployed people. Thereafter, the revolutionary wave appeared in Addis Ababa.

Yes, I believe these are close paraphrasing but I can reword with my own voice and the section is too small for further information. The Supermind (talk) 18:25, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome message. I'm facing a bit of an issue. This user by the name of Sgweirdo on President of Singapore keeps reverting my edits claiming they were "vandalism" without elaborating. One of their edit summaries were "Headache... Please do not make unnecessary change especially when you don't edit this article regularly. Thank you." I find this incredibly frustrating as this seems against the idea of a collaborative project. I honestly do not think that adding the country's other official languages especially on an article relating to its President and what exactly the President's powers are constitutes as "vandalism". It's no different to President of India, President of Ireland or President of France, among others. What are my options? I've reverted them back but I won't be surprised if Sgweirdo reverts me again. Another note, Sgweirdo claims to be "retired" and "no longer active on Wikipedia" based on his user page but this seems to be contradictory as well. Thanks again. Hnseryification (talk) 12:17, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

If someone has challenged and removed your edit, you're not supposed to reinstate it without discussing. The place to open a discussion is on the article talk page.

Repeatedly reinstating your preferred version of the article is called edit warring, which is not allowed. Obviously though, the other editor was incorrect when he called your addition vandalism; it was not. I suggest you find out more about how to edit effectively by looking at the material presented at some of the links on your talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 12:30, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Could you please take a look at his. Not sure when the song was written, so unsure if it is still under copyright restrictions. Thank you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:57, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

onel5969 and Diannaa, it seems to be copyright, see here. TSventon (talk) 14:16, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Have removed and requested revdel. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:21, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

onel5969, sorry I think I got the wrong song. Theory and Practice in Heritage and Sustainability, edited by Elizabeth Auclair, Graham Fairclough, lists " 'Beautiful Jersey' Based on the English original, words and music by Lindsay Lennox (d. 1906); Jèrriais words by Frank Le Maistre (1910–2002) " I will defer to Diannaa's opinion. TSventon (talk) 16:16, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

No worries... lol... I should have paid more attention to the link you provided. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:19, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

The English words are public domain because the author died in 1906, but the Jerrais translation is copyright, as the translator died in 2002. — Diannaa (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, what is WP policy regarding flags, specifically city flags? A historian has sent me historical material, including images of newspaper clippings, concerning the official city flag of St. Augustine, Florida, where I live. I have enough material to write a short article, but I need to know the copyright status of the various flag images, which could be created in svg format if I could find someone here to do it. The two older versions might need to be created from the precise official descriptions of them given in the material. I assume that a photograph of an actual flag flying on a flagpole wouldn't violate the copyright, as long as the photo itself is license-compliant (I could take the photo myself if the flag is flying, and upload it to Commons).

Would the year the flag's representation was created affect its status? There are three slightly different versions of this flag: one from the 1920s, one from the 1950s, and one from the 1990s. Regards, Carlstak (talk) 14:04, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

The place to start with copyright questions is the Commons:Hirtle chart, which shows that the version from the 1920s is the only one that might be in the public domain. Some but not all government works in Florida are public domain. That's about all I have to say as I really don't know for sure and therefore don't want to commit myselif any further. You might ask at the Commons. — Diannaa (talk) 20:41, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Diannaa. Carlstak (talk) 01:27, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I was recommended here by JavaHurricane and Mike1901. During my NPP review for Joy dol I found copyvios from Jonardondishant, who was given a final warning after a series of copyvios. If you could give me suggestions on if my revdel tag is appropriate and whether I should report the user somewhere, that would be great! Many thanks again! VickKiang (talk) 08:24, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest in copyright cleanup. Regarding the revision deletion template, if the two ranges to be hidden have the same end point you only need the earlier start point. I also found some more copying and have done some more cleanup. Regarding reporting, if the final warning was issued by an administrator, you could report the ongoing issue to them. Otherwise you could let me know, or any of the admins listed at Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to investigate copyright matters. — Diannaa (talk) 13:34, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Hey, Diannaa. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 12:11, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

 

Happy First Edit Day!

 

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 13:02, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day! Hi Diannaa! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:43, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks everybody! — Diannaa (talk) 20:45, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Dianaa. Thanks for removing my non-encyclopedic text; I'm always happy to have my work improved. But I'm not sure about the copyvio. The archive you quoted was of a valedictory speech made by, or in part composed by User:Peter Seligman. His name appears at the bottom of the eulogy. Anyhow, its easy to rewrite, but thought I'd let you know that his sins are not venial. Doug butler (talk) 22:00, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Since the text has previously been published elsewhere online, we can't host it here unless it's released under a compatible license. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how it's done. — Diannaa (talk) 22:33, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello again, Diannaa. Upon taking a further look at Draft:La Petatera, an article translated from the Spanish Wikipedia, link, that I moved to drafts, the translated version of this is quite similar to Draft:La Petatera. For example, the translated version states:

Its constructive antecedents have their origin in a deep religious tradition, when in the 17th century, beginning in 1658, the town of Colima, ruined by tremors, decided to put themselves under the protection of San Felipe de Jesús as patron saint, whom from then on , consecrate each year the religious and pagan festivals, among which are the bullfights.

'Compare to the draft:

Its constructive antecedents have their origin in a religious tradition, when in the 17th century, beginning in 1658, the town of Colima, ruined by eathquakes, decided to put itself under the protection of San Felipe de Jesús as patron saint, whom from then on is consecrated each year at the beginning of February with the religious and pagan festivals, among which are the bullfights.

Except for superficial rewording: "tremors"- "earthquakes", this IMHO might be a copyvio.

Compare

It is structurally formed by a wooden framework of various types that occur in the region and according to the characteristics of the system, either to absorb traction efforts through purlins and stringers, or to transmit compression forces to the land by means of pitchforks.

from

It is structurally formed by a wooden framework of various types that occur in the region and, according to the characteristics of the system, either to absorb traction efforts through purlins and stringers or to transmit compression forces to the land by means of pitchforks.

This is identical.

Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Mexico, I couldn't find evidence that this content is free, public domain, or compatible with CCBYSA. If you have time, could you please inform me if this is a copyvio or not, and possibly clean up afterwards? Thanks again for your time and help! VickKiang (talk) 05:18, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello VickKiang and thank you for the report. I checked the Terms and Conditions page of the website and found that the source is not compatibly licensed, as it does not allow commercial use and our website does. See Draft talk:La Petatera for more info. — Diannaa (talk) 12:01, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello Diannaa, thank You for correcting me. Of course I want to comply with ALL rules. Therefore I really need to find out what was wrong. I guess I cannot look at my mistakes in an archive. It´s a pity because I did not check earlier: So I do not remember precisely what might have been wrong. I guess I cited many titles of sections of the source each with a tiny bit of out their text body and wonder if I just forgot quotation marks or if I cited to much at last: It would be great if you could add more specific advice.--Waegend (talk) 18:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 02:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, hope you're doing well and thanks for all you continue to do at CopyPatrol! Just as an FYI, I am traveling through Italy for the next two weeks with limited computer access and will be back on October 23. Hope it won't be too much work during this time – I also gave a heads up to some CCIers that any extra help at CopyPatrol would be appreciated. DanCherek (talk) 08:59, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice Dan! I might need that extra coffee. I hope you have a wonderful trip. — Diannaa (talk) 11:43, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Diannaa, I'm The Supermind that you block my account in order to prevent copyright violation in Draft:Insurance in Ethiopia. Regarding our principle under WP:Copyright violations, I read it for two days and I deserve this block, in fact that I didn't recognize or read it carefully and ignored warnings. The policy maintains that every text in Wikipedia is redistributed, and reused and built upon the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC BY-SA) and, except where otherwise noted, the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts). Thus, they are in public domain, and introduction of texts from non-free sites to Wikipedia articles, especially without permission, is strictly prohibited by the policy.

Nevertheless, even close paraphrasing content identical to non-free medium is also prohibited. Close paraphrasing is my big problem as I type to add words in article. I'm now learned to the mistakes and really apologized for my neglect actions. For the next time, if I am unsure whether text should be non-free or not, I would request edit rather than insert unverifiably in order to survey close paraphrasing. This is the first time block. I will not repeat the same action again. I do continue productive edits as established user. Please give me a chance. Regards 196.188.224.102 (talk) 14:58, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Please apply for unblock via the UTRS system using the instructions already in place on your user talk page. Please don't evade your block using IPs or create new accounts to evade your block. — Diannaa (talk) 19:37, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello Diannaa, thank you for informing me about the problem! I'm writing to inquiry about what I should do. All it takes is paraphrasing my sources, correct? Thanks! Brat Forelli (talk) 21:55, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. This is easier to do if your added text is based on multiple sources rather than just one. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Paraphrase: Write It in Your Own Words. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study this module aimed at WikiEd students. — Diannaa (talk) 22:06, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

I see, that turns out simpler that I imagined. Thank you so much, you're sweet! Brat Forelli (talk) 11:37, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. Draft:Ara Tekian was run through AfC twice, failed both times. Recently, the creating editor requested deletion of the draft, and has recreated with copy paste in mainspace. I moved back to draft. I suspect that some history merging is called for, and perhaps some greater admin action? Bringing to your attention as an expert on copyright issues -- please let me know if I should do something different. I will comment that the page is substantively identical to User:Venim Kolne Desim/sandbox (by another editor) and very similar to User:Aratekian/sandbox. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 09:43, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I have deleted User:Aratekian/sandbox which was a copy of https://people.aua.am/team_member/ara-tekian/ and thus was a violation of our copyright policy. I have un-deleted the deleted revisions of Draft:Ara Tekian so its history is now complete. I have redirected User:Venim Kolne Desim/sandbox to Draft:Ara Tekian. I don't know if a history merge is necessary or possible between these two. You can use the {{histmerge}} template to propose a histmerge and see what happens. — Diannaa (talk) 11:48, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I don't think that the history merge is obviously called for, since the edits in question were by a single editor in a short period of time. Restoring the page history will surely be helpful for neutral editors. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 11:57, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, I corrected a typo in Mister Rogers' Neighborhood (season 7) and noticed that it looks like a copy of the IMDB page, see Earwig report. Episodes 1 to 10 seem to have similar problems, I haven't checked further. Should the pages be deleted? TSventon (talk) 19:09, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi TSventon and thanks for your interest in copyright cleanup. We've had this content since 2011 so it's impossible to say at this point who had it first. So I am not going to act on your report. — Diannaa (talk) 23:11, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for investigating, I don't normally work on that kind of article. TSventon (talk) 17:49, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

  You are invited to join the discussion at WP:MCQ § How much similarity before posting at WP:CPN?. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:51, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. Perhaps you can help the OP out with their question? -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:53, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

But someone already answered the question. Is there a reason why their answer is not sufficient? — Diannaa (talk) 01:32, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

My apologies. For some reason, I missed that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:18, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello,

You mistakenly identified some material on the Kevin O'Higgins article as a copyright violation and removed it today. Whereas the suspected source of the material also refers to the same event, in fact it came from an Irish Times article (Bushe, A (11 June 2007) 'The Irish Times': Details of O'Higgins killers revealed in security files: at p. 6), and was appropriately referenced. The same article is also referenced by the blog post that was mistakenly identified as the source of the material. The article is available at: the Irish Times.

If you do not have an Irish Times subscription, I am happy to download a copy of the article and furnish it to you Gatepainter (talk) 11:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

The blog post displays it as a quotation from the Irish Times. It doesn't matter where you copied it from, or where our bot detected it. Adding copyright text to Wikipedia is a violation of our copyright policy regardless, and regardless of whether or not you cite your source. — Diannaa (talk) 13:06, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

@Diannaa In addition to Copyrights issues, some articles are titled with Trade Mark or Service Marked phrases without recognizing their status. In some cases the articles go on to redefine the subject of the Mark. What is Wikipedia policy on these uses?
::Thank you Bbachrac (talk) 16:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Could you give me an example? Do you mean titles of articles? Why would that be a problem? — Diannaa (talk) 18:55, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your question:
Feldenkrais Method is a registered service mark of the Feldenkrais Guild of North America registered with the USPTO. (The capitalization of trade or service marks does not change their registration.) The article neither recognizes the sercice mark or conveys from a neutral point of view the practice as regulated by the Guild. (Wikipedia has many Guild related articles.) The article incorrectly mis-categorizes the Feldenkrais Method as Alternative Medicine whereas the NCCIH and other reliable sources describe it as a complementary health practice.The difference between complementary and alternative is significant. Complementary Health is practiced in conjunction with licensed Medical and Health practice.

Please note I do not have a relationship with the Feldenkrais Guilds or other conflict of interest. I do want Wikipedia to provide accurate neutral verifiable information since it often is the first source of links in searches for information. Bbachrac (talk) 21:52, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

This is something you need to talk about on the article's talk page. not here. — Diannaa (talk) 00:34, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

You asked for an example specific to a service mark. I agree the details of the article are supposed to be worked out on the Talk pages and I was providing some context. The reality is that rational neutral revision consensus on "guarded" articles is not possible. Even if some sub-set of editors agree, other editors can just "undo" without joining the discussion.

To conclude, the Wikimedia Foundation receives financial gain from operating Wikipedia and is therefore legally responsible for recognizing registered marks. On the other hand, no Mark holder is likely to bother pursuing the issue, so it is likely moot.

Thank you for your time. Bbachrac (talk) 15:38, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Dianna, could you please take a look at the above article which I tagged G12 with Page Curation, the author says it's from another freely licenced site (see my talk page) but the 2 url's I added are showing 98% and 91% with Earwig and both have copyright stated on their websites, I see you had interaction over copyright with the author on their talk page re another article minutes before my tag. Thanks and have a great weekend Josey Wales ^Parley 19:29, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

The two sources mentioned in your G12 notmination do not appear to be compatibly licensed. You were right to tag it. I will not be the deleting admin though. Best to let someone else do a second check. — Diannaa (talk) 19:54, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Josey Wales ^Parley 20:06, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Is this work now in public domain? Since it was published in 1959, 63 years ago, the public domain period under Canadian law is 50 years.–MinisterOfReligion ^(Talk) 20:47, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

You are incorrect. In Canada, works are copyright for 50 years from the death of the author. Your link also clearly shows that this work is copyright. — Diannaa (talk) 00:16, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

For use on Wikipedia, content must be available both in the source country and in the United States, because that is where our servers are located. A good place to go for copyright information is Commons:Hirtle chart. You will see that without knowing the date of death of the author, it is impossible to determine the copyright status of any particular item. — Diannaa (talk) 00:22, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks.–MinisterOfReligion ^(Talk) 14:14, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I directly copied content from Gregory S. Paul (2019) onto the page of Maraapunisaurus. I was in quite a rush to put the information onto the page, for I noticed that most people on the internet were taking the Limaysaurus-based estimates as definitive and were unaware of the flaws. They also seem to be unaware the more recent estimates by G.S. Paul and Larramendi's book, and they always quoted the Carpenter (2018) estimate. That's not to say I hate Kenneth Carpenter, it's just that people need to be more aware of the other Maraapunisaurus estimates. Thus, because of the somewhat obscure later estimates,

Dear Diannaa, do you have magical software tools to spot and quantify copyvios, or is it just the application of elbow grease? The reason I ask is that I've seen some clear but maybe smallish copyvios in an article, British Rail Class 717, where editor/s seem to have directly copied chunks from one or more of the sources. Now, if you do have magic analysis tools then I will not feel so guilty about asking you to take a look. On the other hand if you do not, and it's just old-fashioned clicking-and-comparing, then there is no justification for my being so appallingly lazy, and I should, nay must, do it myself when/if I eventually get round to it. Please advise! Cheers DBaK (talk) 17:59, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, DBaK. The main tool is https://copyvios.toolforge.org/ but it doesn't always catch everything so manual comparison is helpful too. I will clean the article now. Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa (talk) 18:34, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Both for the info and for looking at the train. I swear I wasn't trying to blag you into doing it, but I am most grateful that you did. Cheers DBaK (talk) 19:40, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, how do you challenge the license of File:Asra Panahi.jpg. It seems to me that the claims that support the license are incorrect. What do you think?--Bbb23 (talk) 22:51, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

I was just looking at a couple of deceased people's articles today; first I was viewing the article Death of Mahsa Amini and later looked at Trayvon Martin to verify that it's okay to add an image. They both have similarly tagged non-free images. So I would not challenge it. — Diannaa (talk) 22:57, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:06, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Adding: The place to go for tags and criterion for image deletion is Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Files. If you think there's an invalid fair use claim it's an F7. Criterion themselves are at WP:NFCCP. — Diannaa (talk) 23:08, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi. You removed the results for the referendum question saying it was "copyright content". It was actually copied from this page from the section titled "Capital Plan borrowing questions" https://vancouver.ca/news-calendar/unofficial-2022-vancouver-election-results.aspx The material you removed was literally the questions that appeared on the ballot so it is public domain information and not under copyright. Londoninium (talk) 00:19, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

2022 Vancouver municipal election. Their terms of use page says that contents of their website are available only for "personal, educational, or non-commercial purposes." So we can't host the content here. Regardless of the copyright issue, such material should be briefly summarized, not copied verbatim. — Diannaa (talk) 00:26, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

"personal, educational, or non-commercial purposes." - "or", not "and". Wikipedia is a 501(3)(c) charity so it is non-commercial and its mandate is educational so there is no violation of that website's terms of service and, regardless, since the material is the actual ballot question it's in the public domain. If you want to summarize the ballot questions that's fine but I think it's incorrect to strike the edits as copyright violations when they are not. Londoninium (talk) 01:50, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Wikipedia may be a charity, but not all Wikipedia reusers are. WP:COPY isn't only for content used on Wikipedia, it's also to make Wikipedia content easy to be reused by anyone who wants to do so outside of Wikipedia. This is why the licensing of that website isn't sufficent for Wikipedia's purposes. In addition, a ballot is like any other printed work in that it's not within the public domain simply because its made publicly available. Is there anything in c:COM:CANADA that might be applicable to this? For example, under US copyright law, works created by US federal government employees as part of their official duties are considered to be within the public domain, but works created by empoyees at the state, county or municipal level might not be as explained here. If Canadian copyright is similar and the ballot was created by an employee of the national government, then it might be public domain. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:13, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

In Canada, government works enjoy copyright protection, including works of the federal government, which are protected for 50 years from publication date. — Diannaa (talk) 12:53, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, our CC-by-SA allows all uses, including commercial use. So a terms of service that only allows personal, educational, or non-commercial purposes is not a compatible license. — Diannaa (talk) 12:56, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Diannaa, a bit of recent copyright violation here. Rev/delete at your convenience. Thank you and cheers, 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:83FA (talk) 15:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa (talk) 21:17, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Diannaa, thank you for reviewing my work and removing it for copy right. i have re done all the work plaese help to get me better at changing this. i have all the primision from Round table international to use there information. please how can i set up so it is not an copy right problem. thanks BenKin85 (talk) 16:42, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 18:58, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa – I've run into another article with a broken reference that I can't fix because the relevant revisions have been deleted. Would you be able to help at Kyaing Kyaing please? —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 10:19, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Found it. Sorry for the mistake. — Diannaa (talk) 10:24, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 10:27, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, at Uranians you just made an edit to remove "copyright content copied from https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v49n03_14 https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v49n03_14". As I can't compare the edit to the previous version of the article I'm not sure what was removed, but the sentence fragment cited from the abstract at the said url is still in the article. I can't just now find Wikipedia's policy on directly quoting third-party content, but when doing so I usually give not more than part of a sentence. Could you clarify what the issue is? Thanks. (If absolutely no copyrighted text - not even a sentence fragment - can be cited literally, I was unaware of that, and Wikipedia seems to be chock-full of such quotations.) Ni'jluuseger (talk) 13:24, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. There were no quotation marks or any indication that it was intended to be a quotation. They were not fragments, there were complete sentences copied. Here is a link to the report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what was found by the detection service.

— Diannaa (talk) 13:36, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, your link is about the article Bloch's theorem; could you recheck? I've now identified the removed edit at Uranians, which involved, I believe, two separate fragments of a single sentence quoted (not any complete sentence). If I can check the iThenticate report I can study the issue and be aware of how to go about this in future. Sorry for the extra work. Ni'jluuseger (talk) 14:34, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, here is the correct link. This is enough copying to be a violation of our copyright policy. — Diannaa (talk) 19:46, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

This edit [1] seems to have added copyright material from [2]. Copyright is asserted on this [3] tab.SovalValtos (talk) 19:31, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for the report. I have done some revision deletion. The current version looks okay per Earwig's tool. — Diannaa (talk) 20:13, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I think you were mistaken with your copyright removal on Jay's Jungle: Kiddle.co is a mirror of Wikipedia - see Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks/JKL#Kids_Encyclopedia_Facts. wizzito | say hello! 19:49, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

I see the same content at websites such as IMDb, Apple TV, and elsewhere, so I won't be restoring it. Here is a sample: "Every day, the wise and funny C-Mor shines his magical light across the world searching for thoughts and questions to be explored." Another sample: "The adventurous spirit of Jay and the team sees them continually end up in wonderfully weird situations, which lead to interesting discoveries! " Obvious copyvio is obvious. :) — Diannaa (talk) 20:02, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for clarification. Guess it was copyvio, but not originally from Kiddle.co. wizzito | say hello! 20:03, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Diannaa! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! Volten001 ☎ 06:08, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa (talk) 19:25, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I wish to ask you for help protecting the page Salima Sultan Begum. Recently, a new user named Nuch India has been making disruptive edits despite being a warning issued. The references cited when matched with the information added do not match. Many have been repeatedly reverting those edits but it's following to no avail. The edits are also not made in a conducive outlook.

Moreover, the editing style has been very similar to my editing on the page of Mariam-uz-Zamani with the user name also much similar to mine. I request you to assist me in protecting that page against any vandalism or edits that distorts the policy of a neutral point of view on this platform. Thanks and Regards Nush1125 (talk) 16:50, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, someone else has already taken care of this. — Diannaa (talk) 19:25, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Happy adminship anniversary! Hi Diannaa! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:45, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa (talk) 23:07, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I wish to ask you to help in protecting page Nur Jahan against vandalism and violation of WP:NPOV. The past few days have seen that page being edited by different IPs but the information which is tried to be added remains the same and much without references. That page alone has seen excessive flattery and that too without any reliable reference. Many rollbackers have been trying to continuously restore that page but when one user is dealt with there is some other IP trying to add the very same unsourced information which in my point doesn't coincide with the neutral point of view policy on this platform.

Could you please tell me what are my options here or where and how such cases are dealt with? In case you could assist in any manner I'll be highly grateful. Thanks Nush1125 (talk) 06:55, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Nush1125. Requests for page protection are handled at WP:RFPP. — Diannaa (talk) 12:06, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	This award is given to Diannaa for collecting more than 10 points doing reviews and re-reviews, in the October NPP backlog reduction drive. Thank you for your contributions. Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 08:49, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa (talk) 15:10, 30 October 2022 (UTC)