User talk:Moonriddengirl: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message: new section Tag: |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} |
|archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} |
||
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
||
|counter = |
|counter = 62 |
||
|algo = old( |
|algo = old(10d) |
||
|archive = User talk:Moonriddengirl/Archive %(counter)d |
|archive = User talk:Moonriddengirl/Archive %(counter)d |
||
}} |
}} |
||
{| style="width: 100%; background-color: #FFFFF0; border: 3px solid #E2725B; padding: 10px; margin-bottom: 8px; vertical-align: top;" |
|||
| colspan=3 style="vertical-align:top" | |
|||
{{User talk:Moonriddengirl/header}} |
{{User talk:Moonriddengirl/header}} |
||
{{ |
{{archives|banner=yes}} |
||
{{Quote box2 |
{{Quote box2 |
||
|width = 30% |
|width = 30% |
||
| Line 18: | Line 17: | ||
|title_bg = #F5DEB3 |
|title_bg = #F5DEB3 |
||
|title_fnt = |
|title_fnt = |
||
|title = |
|title = Reaching me |
||
|halign = top |
|halign = top |
||
|quote = During my current work interim position, I have found myself with not a lot of spare time that isn't consumed by family. I can go long periods without logging in to Wikipedia. If you have an urgent note for me here, please consider alerting me via email at {{nospam|mdennis|wikimedia.org}}. (This is my work email address, and I do not mix work and volunteering, but mailing that address makes sure I will see it promptly, usually within a day.) If not urgent, I'll come by as soon as I can, and I heartily welcome talk page stalkers. :) Oh, I have discovered that sometimes when people don't ''tell'' me it's a volunteer contact, I have handled it with the wrong hat on. Please make which "me" you want clear! |
|||
|quote = In general, I check in with Wikipedia under this account around 12:00 [[:Coordinated Universal Time]] on weekdays. I try to check back in at least once more during the day. On weekends, I'm here more often. When you loaded this page, it was {{Time|UTC}}. [[Wikipedia:Bypass your cache|Refresh]] your page to see what time it is now. |
|||
|salign = |
|salign = |
||
|source = |
|source = |
||
| Line 26: | Line 25: | ||
{{bots|deny=DPL bot}} |
{{bots|deny=DPL bot}} |
||
== RAF Merryfield & possible copyvio == |
|||
I went to the [[RAF Merryfield]] article to try to add some references and found much of the text is very similar to [http://www.forces-war-records.co.uk/Unit-Info/1852 this site]. It was added to wp in 2007 ([http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=RAF_Merryfield&diff=131940523&oldid=131929313 diff]) but I have no idea whether wp or the other site had the text first - should I add a copyvio label?— [[User:Rodw|Rod]] <sup>[[User talk:Rodw|talk]]</sup> 21:49, 28 February 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:Hi. :) A quick search suggests that website is rather new ([http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.forces-war-records.co.uk/Unit-Info/*]), but that's not definitive, because it could have come from somewhere else (meaning the website - they do sometimes move. :D). Their "[http://www.forces-war-records.co.uk/About-Us About Us]" page suggests that may be the case, as they claim to have been around since 2001. Given that, I want to take a look at the evolution of the content to see if I can tell which came first. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 12:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::Okay, typo at [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=RAF_Merryfield&diff=131940523&oldid=131929313 insertion point] ("to he built") suggests it was either transcribed from a book or developed here naturally. That error is not on the external site. Excellent sign [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=RAF_Merryfield&diff=next&oldid=131940523 minutes later] with small changes such as camp->airfield and August 24->24 August. The external site uses both of them. The "Ahhot" typo is a little concerning, though, as that kind of thing usually indicates a poorly digitized source - the scanner misreads the lower line of the "b". Also note "2$" for 26 and "September &" for "September 6". [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=RAF_Merryfield&diff=next&oldid=132047966 Here's more of that]: "Ramshury" instead of "Ramsbury". But again a change is made ("with Merryfield" becomes "with the station"). I think the source you spotted copied from us, but if I could get inside of it, I'd be looking at ''[http://books.google.com/books/about/UK_Airfields_of_the_Ninth.html?id=BK7mAQAACAAJ UK Airfields of the Ninth]'', the source, for matches. :/ I don't suppose you have a copy of that book, do you? I'd love to eliminate that concern. Unfortunately, the contributor who added the article does have an early history of issues (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bwmoll3&oldid=339590834#Copyright_problem 1] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bwmoll3&oldid=392621211#39th_Military_Airlift_Squadron 2], for instance. There are other CSB notices, but I'm not checking those, having verified these two). I need to make sure that the content was not copied and that, if it was, the content is PD and properly attributed per current plagiarism guidelines. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 13:24, 1 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thanks for looking. I don't have the ''UK Airfields of the Ninth'' book but did get the Berryman one out of the library - which prompted my interest in the article. Your expertise and tenaciousness in these queries is brilliant.— [[User:Rodw|Rod]] <sup>[[User talk:Rodw|talk]]</sup> 13:34, 1 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::::Thanks. I've had a lot of practice. :D I guess I'll start with [[WP:REX]]. They can sometimes help. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 13:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Check back at REX, me. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 13:07, 2 March 2014 (UTC) |
|||
== COI, OTRS, Disclosure == |
|||
Hello! I heard you might be interested in this discussion. I'd love to hear your thoughts about how we as individual community volunteers could best handle this. |
|||
* [[User_talk:Ocaasi#Declaring_COI]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:COIN#Direct_COI_representatives_to_talk_pages:_disclosure_and_review]]. |
|||
* [[User:Ocaasi/COIreview]] |
|||
They involve what happens when a COI editor or representative is led to a talk page and advised to engage there. Since this sometimes happens through OTRS with sensitive or controversial subjects; I'm trying to clarify guidance on how to make it clear that COI editors even when assisted through OTRS get no special privileges and other editors have no particular obligations to do what is requested or suggested. I've also emailed the OTRS list to ask a similar question about clarifying our position in these situations. Cheers :) [[User:Ocaasi|Ocaasi]]<sup> [[User talk:Ocaasi|t ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Ocaasi| c]]</sup> 20:12, 25 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:I responded on the talk page. I'm not yet convinced this is needed. If needed, I'm not yet convinced this is the way to respond. --[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#002868;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">SPhilbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 17:32, 26 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::I've put some thoughts on the talk page, too. I'm a bit confused by the first two sections, I have to say. I think I lack the background to understand what's going on there. At my [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mdennis_(WMF)&oldid=546960570#COI_disclosure_.28and_OTRS.29 work talk page], you suggested that you were looking for "how best to make it abundantly clear that COI editors even when assisted through OTRS get no special privileges and other editors have no particular obligations to do what is requested or suggested". I guess my main question would be to whom? If you want to make it most clear to the COI editors, I would mention it briefly at every point where they are directed to OTRS, such as [[Wikipedia:Contact us - Subjects]]. Are you planning to propose edits to the COI page or a separate page? Either way, perhaps a clear "What you should/should not expect" section like the one [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Help|here]] would be useful. |
|||
{{-}} |
|||
::If you want to make it clear to other editors, I'm afraid there may be different issues - they should already know [[WP:Consensus]] and should certainly [[WP:AGF]]. Why should the motives of OTRS agents be suspect? --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 11:16, 27 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
== Protection on [[Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content]] == |
|||
Hello! I just wanted to quickly ask if you would object to lowering the protection on [[Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content]] from full protection down to a level that would allow others to make minor bold changes. In particular, the editnotice on the page even says "While you may be bold in making minor changes to this page, you should be extremely cautious about making substantive changes", but this is not possible due to full protection since 2009. [[User:EggRoll97|EggRoll97]] <sup>([[User_talk:EggRoll97|talk]]) </sup> 03:01, 20 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Good points MRG. At the moment this guidance is incorporated into [[WP:PSCOI]]. I'll take a look at the Contact us page and see if there's a good place for a note. I think it already covers the community process priority, but I'll check. I don't think that OTRS motives should be suspect by default (I'm an OTRS'er myself), but I learned last week that some people interpreted OTRS requests brought to talk pages as coming from 'on high' as if they were blessed with special power. I was responding to that in drafting the text. I agree that AGF would help, but AGF and COI sometimes get fuzzy at the intersection. [[User:Ocaasi|Ocaasi]]<sup> [[User talk:Ocaasi|t ]]|[[Special:Contributions/Ocaasi| c]]</sup> 17:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:Hello! I'm probably way too late to be useful to you here, [[User:EggRoll97|EggRoll97]]. Sorry about that! I'm not sure if this has been considered by community or a decision made, but I think it probably ought to be a consensus consideration. My thought is simply this - that particular page is a contract between Wikipedia's editors and reusers, and serious errors can lead to very serious ramifications for people who take that page on good faith and think they are complying. The [[Wikipedia:General disclaimer]] is fully protected for a very similar reason, as explained at [[Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Permanent_protection]]. However, that policy does not say whether "Reusing Wikipedia content" IS among "Pages that should not be modified for legal reasons" - which is why I think consensus is appropriate. But I myself think it ''is''. Again, very sorry for my delay. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 13:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Do you remember [[User:GrahamBould]]? == |
|||
== Where to list copyright problem - text from obit copied into article space == |
|||
Hello {{u|Moonriddengirl}}, |
|||
You may be interested in [[Wikipedia:Contributor_copyright_investigations#GrahamBould|this discussion]] at WP:CCI, involving edits by [[User:GrahamBould]], whom you were involved with around 2009. A lot of their problematic edits had been dealt with by you and other volunteers at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gastropods/Subpage for organizing CopyVio Cleanup]], but some that you missed have now resurfaced. One article had most of its revision history deleted yesterday (1251 revisions spanning 18 years), and there are about 1700 articles that may be affected. legal@wikimedia.org has been made aware, as suggested today at WP:AN, but maybe you can remember what happened back then (as you appear to be the only editor who was involved in 2009, and who is at least somewhat active as of 2024), and how to best proceed. Thank you! [[User:Renerpho|Renerpho]] ([[User talk:Renerpho|talk]]) 06:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I have a concern about text from an obituary copied into main article space, for the article about deceased journalist, [[Anthony Lewis]]. |
|||
== Nomination of [[:Susan Alice Buffett]] for deletion == |
|||
<div class="afd-notice"> |
|||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0;">[[File:Ambox warning orange.svg|48px|alt=|link=]]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article [[:Susan Alice Buffett]] is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to [[Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines|Wikipedia's policies and guidelines]] or whether it should be [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deleted]]. |
|||
The article will be discussed at '''[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susan Alice Buffett]]''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. |
|||
It's technically not ''yet'' a copyvio because the user that did this also in the same edit commented-out that material for some reason. |
|||
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 12:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I've raised this issue on the user's talk page at [[User_talk:Bmclaughlin9#Copying_New_York_Times_content_directly_into_article_space]]. |
|||
== Invitation to participate in a research == |
|||
*It looks like the user [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Lewis&diff=547298467&oldid=547185706 copied text] directly into article space from the [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/26/us/anthony-lewis-pulitzer-prize-winning-columnist-dies-at-85.html?pagewanted=all New York Times obit]. |
|||
Hello, |
|||
*This can be seen by comparing ''[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Lewis&diff=547298467&oldid=547185706 "Yet for all Mr. Lewis’s engagement with that Constitutional pillar..."]'', with, ''[http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/26/us/anthony-lewis-pulitzer-prize-winning-columnist-dies-at-85.html?pagewanted=all "Yet for all Mr. Lewis’s engagement with that Constitutional pillar"...]''. |
|||
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this '''[https://wikimediafoundation.limesurvey.net/294789?lang=en anonymous survey]'''. |
|||
*I also asked the user if they have ever done this practice previously of copying text directly into article space and then making it commented-out. |
|||
You do not have to be an Administrator to participate. |
|||
Perhaps you can help in the proper way to list this at [[Wikipedia:Copyright problems]], as I'm not sure precisely where it goes there? |
|||
The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Research:Wikipedia Administrator Recruitment, Retention, and Attrition|Meta page]] and view its [[wmf:Special:MyLanguage/Legal:Administrator Experiences 2024 Survey Privacy Statement|privacy statement]] . |
|||
The article itself is notable and obviously shouldn't be deleted, and the edit is recent, and there appears to be some good sourced info added elsewhere in that edit, but certainly at least that part of that edit is problematic. |
|||
Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns. |
|||
Thank you for your time, — '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 01:28, 28 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:It looks like the original material in question has since been removed from the article by the editor that added it, but this issue could still use some looking into. — '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 17:40, 28 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::Update: [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bmclaughlin9&curid=25284060&diff=547486063&oldid=547369673 user removed that section I'd referred to above from his talk page]. — '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 20:24, 28 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
Kind Regards, |
|||
:::Hi. I think that would be a copyright issue - even commented out, the content is still published on Wikipedia. The best way to handle it is an interesting question. CP is generally for where the content can't be easily excised or where removal is controversial, with something like, removal is pretty easy. But this practice is concerning and does lead to close paraphrasing issues in articles. For instance, I see he placed text [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Lewis&diff=547298467&oldid=547185706 here] that included the following: |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
|||
|- |
|||
! [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/26/us/anthony-lewis-pulitzer-prize-winning-columnist-dies-at-85.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0 Source] !! Article |
|||
|- |
|||
| In 1991, Mr. Lewis published “Make No Law,” an account of New York Times v. Sullivan, the 1964 Supreme Court decision that revolutionized American libel law. The Sullivan case, applying First Amendment principles to state libel law for the first time, ruled that public officials suing critics of their official conduct had to prove that the contested statements were made with “actual malice,” meaning with knowledge of their falsity or with serious subjective doubts about their truth. || In 1991, Mr. Lewis published ''Make No Law'', an account of ''[[New York Times v. Sullivan]]'', the 1964 Supreme Court decision that revolutionized American libel law. In ''Sullivan'', teh court held that public officials suing critics of their official conduct needd to prove that the contested statements were made with "actual malice", that is, with knowledge of their falsity or with serious subjective doubts about their truth. |
|||
|} |
|||
[[mw:Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia Research|WMF Research Team]] |
|||
:::The first sentence is still copied exactly from the source - the second follows lockstep on its structure and includes significant runs of language. |
|||
<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">[[User:BGerdemann (WMF)|BGerdemann (WMF)]] ([[User talk:BGerdemann (WMF)|talk]]) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) </bdi> |
|||
:::I'm not sure how widespread an issue this may be in his writing. :/ It's generally pretty time consuming to even evaluate that. I see that the editor explained that he was interrupted when working on the material, and you've advised him that it isn't best practice - with which I absolutely concur. Hopefully, he won't continue to work in this way, but the question still remains of what may linger from the past. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 13:25, 29 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins&oldid=27650221 --> |
|||
::::I agree with you. :) You're more of an expert in this arena than I, what's the next prudent step? — '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 13:44, 29 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::::The next prudent step is to run him through the CCI program and evaluate his major text contributions to see if a [[WP:CCI]] is needed. :/ After I do a survey, I spot check generally 10 to 15 articles, depending on what I'm finding as I go. If I check five articles and find no problems, I may assume that it was a one-off, not a pattern. If I find concerning traces, but am unsure the level it reaches, I may continue to look more indepth. I'll do that this weekend. ('''Note to me: do it!''') --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 13:52, 29 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Okay, thank you very much. — '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 13:54, 29 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
{{outdent}}Keep me posted with what you find out? — '''[[User:Cirt|Cirt]]''' ([[User talk:Cirt|talk]]) 13:55, 29 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
== Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research == |
|||
:While I've checked a number of articles that seem fine (and a few where the source is tucked behind a paywall), this is the first problem I've found: |
|||
**[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=454900174] to [http://www.nytimes.com/1992/12/27/world/john-melby-79-who-tied-ouster-as-a-diplomat-to-hellman-affair.html]. See [http://toolserver.org/~dcoetzee/duplicationdetector/ duplication detector]. Subsequent work has substantially changed it, but there may still be some close paraphrasing. Should be checked. Still looking. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 23:56, 30 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
**Not a copyright problem, because the source is PD, but a plagiarism issue: [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=537092362], [http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/02/07/president-obama-nominates-two-serve-us-court-appeals-federal-circuit]: [http://toolserver.org/~dcoetzee/duplicationdetector/compare.php?url1=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fw%2Findex.php%3Fdiff%3D537092362&url2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whitehouse.gov%2Fthe-press-office%2F2013%2F02%2F07%2Fpresident-obama-nominates-two-serve-us-court-appeals-federal-circuit&minwords=2&minchars=13]. It's clearly still a plagiarism issue, per [[Wikipedia:Plagiarism]], as it includes substantial duplication of content without proper acknowledgment of copying. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 00:00, 31 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
**Just to note: I think it would be informative if someone could compare [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20B13FF355B1B728DDDAE0894D8415B848AF1D3 the source] to [[Winfred Overholser]]. |
|||
**[http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=333139193&oldid=prev Not okay]. And unsurprisingly it still violates policy with respect to text taken verbatim but not marked as quotation from [http://libraries.mit.edu/sites/mithistory/institute/offices/office-of-the-mit-president/samuel-wesley-stratton-1861-1931/ this copyrighted source]. I'm not sure how extensive it is or if text is taken from other sources, but that article is worth further examination. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 00:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
|||
|- |
|||
! [http://libraries.mit.edu/sites/mithistory/institute/offices/office-of-the-mit-president/samuel-wesley-stratton-1861-1931/ Source] !! Article |
|||
|- |
|||
| In 1899 he was asked to head the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey’s Office of Weights and Measures, where he developed the plan for the establishment of a bureau of standards. || IIn 1899 he was asked to head the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey's Office of Weights and Measures, where he developed the plan for the establishment of a bureau of standards. |
|||
|} |
|||
Hello, |
|||
===Update=== |
|||
Okay, I've spot-checked a number of articles, with some notes above. I see plenty of evidence of thorough rewriting in many articles, but I think there is a pattern of suboptimal composition practice, with using non-free content as the basis for writing that may then lead to inadequate paraphrase. I've popped a worksheet into my userspace: [[User:Moonriddengirl/20130330]] and would be ever-so-grateful for another opinion or two. I am loathe to recommend opening a CCI if problems are minimal, but also hate to say, "Oh, I think corrective practices going forward is good enough" if there are more extensive issues than I've found and could see. People who can see the NYT especially welcome! --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 00:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its [[m:Special:MyLanguage/Research:Wikipedia Administrator Recruitment, Retention, and Attrition|Meta page]] and view its [[wmf:Special:MyLanguage/Legal:Administrator Experiences 2024 Survey Privacy Statement|privacy statement]]. |
|||
== Close paraphrasing?/Remove autopatrolled status? == |
|||
Take the survey '''[https://wikimediafoundation.limesurvey.net/294789?lang=en here]'''. |
|||
I haven't contacted the author because I wanted to see what you had to say first. [[Minea (given name)]] states "Minea is a feminine given name created by Finnish author Mika Waltari for a character in his 1945 novel "The Egyptian." He may have based the name on the Swedish phrase "min egna," meaning "my own."" While the source says "Created by the Finnish writer Mika Waltari for a character in his novel 'The Egyptian' (1945). Waltari may have based the name on the Swedish phrase min egna meaning "my own"." These statements are similar to the extent that I can't imagine that it is acceptable. There's also an issue that reference two seems to either not support the statement or to be original research (it comes from some PDF's that I can't read). Finally, the references are bare urls. I haven't done my due diligence and checked other articles yet, but a really concerning thing here is that the editor has been autopatrolled since 2010. I don't know if that means a huge copyright problem might exist but I think it might be a case where autopatrolled status should be removed. [[User:Ryan Vesey|'''''Ryan''''']] [[User talk:Ryan Vesey|'''''Vesey''''']] 22:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:Okay, I couldn't not finish my research so I checked some more: |
|||
:*[[Farah (given name)]], uses bare URL, "mirth" not supported by source, Pronunciation isn't IPA so is useless. |
|||
:*[[Marwa (given name)]], uses bare URL |
|||
:*[[Suha (given name)]], uses bare URL, i'm nitpicky here, but it should probably mention that Al-Suha is the Arabic name of the star, is the link to the special page Kosher? |
|||
:*[[Farida (given name)]], information not supported by source, bare URL (I didn't think to check these things for the earlier ones, but the article was only improved with a list of names by another editor after it was created [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Farida_(given_name)&oldid=536411156 link at creation] |
|||
:*[[Reem (given name)]], contradicts the source |
|||
:*[[Khalid (given name)]], includes information not supported by the source |
|||
:Problems with the linkrot/dead URLs can be seen at [[Ruth Herbert]] where 2 of the four links no longer work. In any case, after expanding into the articles, I think autopatrolled should be removed but don't think there's a consistent copyright problem. [[User:Ryan Vesey|'''''Ryan''''']] [[User talk:Ryan Vesey|'''''Vesey''''']] 22:20, 23 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::Hi again, Ryan. :) I'd agree with you that the first instance is too close to the source. I'm glad that isn't a pattern! I really don't have much to do with user rights so I'm really not sure when that should be removed or when it is better to simply talk to the editor and explain the concerns. Looking at the contributor in question, he seems quite experienced - he lists at least a number of good articles and DYKs. Maybe the best thing to do is explain to him why bare links are an issue. In terms of adding content not supported by sources, I have to say that I am not encouraged by [[Talk:Ava_(given_name)|this]], which was pure [[WP:NOR|speculation]] that gradually improved when he (or she) found a source that at least mentioned Locklear and Sambora (but didn't support that their use of the name added to popularity). If that's an ongoing issue and he (or she) isn't open to discussion about it, that might be a dispute resolution situation. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 14:36, 24 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:::I've pointed this discussion out to the contributor so we cna see what he says. [[User:Ryan Vesey|'''''Ryan''''']] [[User talk:Ryan Vesey|'''''Vesey''''']] 19:19, 29 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
Kind Regards, |
|||
::I haven't paid much attention to "auto patrolled status" or the administrative aspects of Wikipedia so no, I don't care if you remove it. In recent years I've focused mainly on the names article and have tried to create short articles defining the meaning/usage of the names based on sources I find online. If you think there's a problem with the articles, by all means fix them. --[[User:Bookworm857158367|Bookworm857158367]] ([[User talk:Bookworm857158367|talk]]) 01:30, 30 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
[[mw:Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia Research|WMF Research Team]] |
|||
:::I'll add that I looked back at the various articles you referenced and I don't think I am entirely to blame for some of the issues you mentioned. Some of the information in these stub articles appeared to have been added after I created them. I meant them to be stubs that could give a quick definition and language of origin when people clicked on the List of most popular given names links. Yes, I did use Behind the name.com or other name sites online. I probably used the bare links, which I agree aren't ideal, because it was quick and I was writing them quickly. Regarding the dispute over the Ava name, the name did in fact begin increasing in popularity the year the two celebrity children were born and one of the books I had (but one that wasn't immediately at hand when I was discussing it) referenced that fact. That conversation obviously wasn't my finest hour as an editor. I'm not proud of it and hope it isn't a habit. And yes, I am a woman, not a man. --[[User:Bookworm857158367|Bookworm857158367]] ([[User talk:Bookworm857158367|talk]]) 01:58, 30 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
<bdi lang="en" dir="ltr">[[User:BGerdemann (WMF)|BGerdemann (WMF)]] ([[User talk:BGerdemann (WMF)|talk]]) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC) </bdi> |
|||
== Open Access? == |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:UOzurumba (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=UOzurumba_(WMF)/sandbox_Research_announcement_list_for_enwiki_Current_Admins_(reminders)&oldid=27744339 --> |
|||
== ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message == |
|||
While perusing CP, I ran across [[Nasopharyngeal carcinoma]], which has some copy pastes from a journal article. The journal calls itself Open Access, a term I have not seen before. Their terms are [http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/charter here]. I am worried that the final sentence may not be acceptable to us, but as it is so close, I wanted your opinion. The source is not attributed at all, so I've left a request that attribution be added as a minimum, but we need to decide if excision or major rewrite is required.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#002868;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">SPhilbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 00:50, 30 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:I do not believe this is usable. :/ "provided that no substantive errors are introduced in the process" - who determines what's a substantive error? It does not explicitly permit modification, and that line suggests that if they don't approve of any modifications the license is void. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 23:06, 30 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
::Yeah, that pretty much matches my concern. Thanks.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#002868;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">SPhilbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 00:16, 31 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; "> |
|||
== [[Julie Dash]] article == |
|||
<div class="ivmbox-image noresize" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;">[[File:Scale of justice 2.svg|40px]]</div> |
|||
<div class="ivmbox-text"> |
|||
Hello! Voting in the '''[[WP:ACE2024|2024 Arbitration Committee elections]]''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|end}}-1 day}}. All '''[[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2024#Election timeline|eligible users]]''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. |
|||
The [[WP:ARBCOM|Arbitration Committee]] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration|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 [[WP:BAN|site bans]], [[WP:TBAN|topic bans]], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Policy|arbitration policy]] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. |
|||
I am writing you to request semi-protection on the [[Julie Dash]] article due to long-term persistent vandalism and harassment from anon proxy IPs by WP user whose identity is known. Will provide name privately upon request. Thank you. Best Wishes [[User:Coronerreport|Coronerreport]] ([[User talk:Coronerreport|talk]]) 03:22, 30 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
:Hi. I've looked through the history of the article since the start of the year, and I see one negative edit by an IP: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Julie_Dash&diff=next&oldid=531860376. There are several positive edits, and a couple of weird requests for source clarification that ''may'' be valid, given that I cannot myself find any mention of "Making Angels" in [http://www.cinema.ucla.edu/blogs/la-rebellion/2011/10/07/daughters-dust-1991 the blog post] linked to support it, and it ''is'' a blog post. (Could be a reliable source, though.) I'm afraid I just don't see enough to justify page protection under [[WP:PP|policy]]. :/ --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 23:02, 30 March 2013 (UTC) |
|||
If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review [[Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2024/Candidates|the candidates]] and submit your choices on the '''[[Special:SecurePoll/vote/{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2024|poll}}|voting page]]'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)</small> |
|||
== Web archives == |
|||
</div> |
|||
[[User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Copyright_laws_and_archival_websites_.28again.29|ping]]. [[Special:Contributions/88.104.28.176|88.104.28.176]] ([[User talk:88.104.28.176|talk]]) 20:12, 4 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
</div> |
|||
:I have responded there and to the edit request at [[WP:C]]. As I recommend in both places, you should consider a [[WP:VPP]] proposal or an RFC if you wish to propose a change that substantial to policy. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 20:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2024/Coordination/MM/02&oldid=1258243447 --> |
|||
::"it isn't a unilateral decision" - it seemed to be just that when it was added. But, yeah... that's the way of Wikipedia now, sadly. Can't change anything without 1000 pages of pointless discussions. [[Special:Contributions/88.104.28.176|88.104.28.176]] ([[User talk:88.104.28.176|talk]]) 21:16, 4 April 2013 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 00:13, 19 November 2024
 | |
| Wikipedia ads | file info – #178 |
|
If you are here with questions about an article I have deleted or a copyright concern, please consider first reading my personal policies with regards to deletion and copyright, as these may provide your answer. While you can email me to reach me in my volunteer capacity, I don't recommend it. I very seldom check that email account. If you do email me, please leave a note here telling me so or I may never see it. I hardly ever check that account. To leave a message for me, press the "new section" or "+" tab at the top of the page, or simply click here. Remember to sign your message with ~~~~. I will respond to all civil messages. I attempt to keep conversations in one location, as I find it easier to follow them that way when they are archived. If you open a new conversation here, I will respond to you here. Please watchlist this page or check back for my reply; I will leave you a "talkback" notice if you request one and will generally try to trigger your automatic notification even if you don't. (I sometimes fail to be consistent there; please excuse me if I overlook it.) If I have already left a message at your talk page, unless I've requested follow-up here or it is a standard template message, I am watching it, but I would nevertheless appreciate it you could trigger my automatic notification. {{Ping}} works well for that. If you leave your reply here, I may respond at your talk page if it seems better for context. If you aren't sure if I'm watching your page, feel free to approach me here. |
|
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. | |
Reaching me
During my current work interim position, I have found myself with not a lot of spare time that isn't consumed by family. I can go long periods without logging in to Wikipedia. If you have an urgent note for me here, please consider alerting me via email at mdennis
wikimedia.org. (This is my work email address, and I do not mix work and volunteering, but mailing that address makes sure I will see it promptly, usually within a day.) If not urgent, I'll come by as soon as I can, and I heartily welcome talk page stalkers. :) Oh, I have discovered that sometimes when people don't tell me it's a volunteer contact, I have handled it with the wrong hat on. Please make which "me" you want clear!
Protection on Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content
[edit]Hello! I just wanted to quickly ask if you would object to lowering the protection on Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content from full protection down to a level that would allow others to make minor bold changes. In particular, the editnotice on the page even says "While you may be bold in making minor changes to this page, you should be extremely cautious about making substantive changes", but this is not possible due to full protection since 2009. EggRoll97 (talk) 03:01, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hello! I'm probably way too late to be useful to you here, EggRoll97. Sorry about that! I'm not sure if this has been considered by community or a decision made, but I think it probably ought to be a consensus consideration. My thought is simply this - that particular page is a contract between Wikipedia's editors and reusers, and serious errors can lead to very serious ramifications for people who take that page on good faith and think they are complying. The Wikipedia:General disclaimer is fully protected for a very similar reason, as explained at Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Permanent_protection. However, that policy does not say whether "Reusing Wikipedia content" IS among "Pages that should not be modified for legal reasons" - which is why I think consensus is appropriate. But I myself think it is. Again, very sorry for my delay. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Do you remember User:GrahamBould?
[edit]Hello Moonriddengirl,
You may be interested in this discussion at WP:CCI, involving edits by User:GrahamBould, whom you were involved with around 2009. A lot of their problematic edits had been dealt with by you and other volunteers at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gastropods/Subpage for organizing CopyVio Cleanup, but some that you missed have now resurfaced. One article had most of its revision history deleted yesterday (1251 revisions spanning 18 years), and there are about 1700 articles that may be affected. legal@wikimedia.org has been made aware, as suggested today at WP:AN, but maybe you can remember what happened back then (as you appear to be the only editor who was involved in 2009, and who is at least somewhat active as of 2024), and how to best proceed. Thank you! Renerpho (talk) 06:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Nomination of Susan Alice Buffett for deletion
[edit]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susan Alice Buffett until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.Clarityfiend (talk) 12:04, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
Invitation to participate in a research
[edit]Hello,
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.
You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.
The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .
Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.
Kind Regards,
BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research
[edit]Hello,
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.
Take the survey here.
Kind Regards,
BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)