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
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 5 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Hours of Operation
In general, I check in with Wikipedia frequently between 12:00 and 23:00 Coordinated Universal Time. When you loaded this page, it was 04:17, 9 January 2025 UTC [refresh]. Refresh your page to see what time it is now.
Naval Battle of Kaliakra single sourced article, a direct translation from a Bulgarian internet page, which in it self does not include any sources of the event was taged copyright concern. The page has now been recreated, was this agreed? regards Hittit (talk) 21:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi. I'm sorry. I almost missed this up here at the top. :) (We usually put notes on the bottom on Wikipedia, which is kind of the opposite of the way a lot of websites work.) No, it wasn't agreed, and the copyright problem has not been addressed. I've deleted it again and will speak to the contributor. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thank you for your efforts. regards Hittit (talk) 17:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you. Please let me know if you see additional problems. I'm watchlisting this article space but am concerned that the restoration of this without comment might mean the contributor does not intend to comply and might have created similar copyright problems with translated material. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, it's been a while, I had a question more of a personal/professinal nature from your previous interest in hospice---wasn't sure the protocol, how/if you would want me to proceed. Hope you are well and thanks so much for your previous help with the articleTbolden (talk) 20:51, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to bother you, I did send you an email wasnt sure if you received----I am used to your lightning quick edits on WP----just wanted to make sure you received. Thanks. Tbolden (talk) 15:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[1] is clearly a hoax by a vandalism only editor. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 16:47, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi. Not quite sure the best approach on that one. :/ Their "deletion debate" process can take forever. The general category of problem tags, including speedy deletions, on Commons is at Commons:Category:Problem tags. I don't think any of them specifically apply. What I would probably do in this situation is bring it up at their admin noticeboard or ask a friendly Commons admin how to handle it...and I think I will. :D
- Now I have. I've asked User:Dcoetzee to stop by with ideas or appropriate action. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. He doesn't seem very active though so I've put a request here [2] as you suggested/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 17:43, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- And it's been deleted. Dougweller (talk) 21:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Good job. :) Glad somebody there picked it up. I didn't notice that Derrick was currently out of commission. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I know this isn't your speciality, but I'm sure you'll be able to help in some way. My question is this: if I were to take a photo of my mobile phone and upload it for use in the article, could I license this as CC-BY or would I still have to justify fair-use, due to the copyrighted design etc.? – Toon 23:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm. This one is a bit iffy. I've encountered the question before mostly in the realm of packaging--board games, medication bottles. I'll have a poke at Commons and see what I can come up with. I think I know where to start looking. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I was hoping for a definite answer the Commons Casebook. The closest I see is Commons:Commons:Image casebook#Vehicles, which suggests that the 3D shape is not copyrightable, but that design elements on it may be, if significant. There's an awful lot of cordless phones (Commons:Category:Cordless telephones) and plenty of mobile phones (Category:Mobile phones), but, you know, WP:OTHERSTUFF. Still, I'm inclined on the basis of that to offer tentatively that Commons accepts these images. Want me to ask a Commons admin? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes please, if you don't mind. No rush, though. Cheers,. – Toon 18:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm no lawyer, but it should be fine for a standard phone, providing there's no screenshot or large logo. For your mass-market handset, see this Commons guideline. Naturally, if it's encrusted with jewels or has an ornate cover or something, that would not apply. For a small logo/icon on the casing (or, if unavoidable, on the screen) de minimis will apply, meaning it will be OK. Hope that answers your question. J Milburn (talk) 00:57, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That's great. And no, definitely not encrusted with jewels. Thanks to both of you for your help. – Toon 13:40, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know your forte is copyright issues, but as an admin, I was hoping you would be able to give me a quick piece of advice: If an article was nominated and failed for GA in September 2009, then was renominated again in one month later, and I am reviewing that now, but I notice there haven;t been many major changes, is this eligible for a quick fail? Brambleclawx 23:25, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- To clarify, all that's occurred are minor formatting changes: a moved picture, a new reference and a few new links. Brambleclawx 23:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi. :) I've never reviewed a GA nom, and I've only been involved in GA reviews as a writer a couple of times. I suppose I'd ask myself first what it failed for; did it fail for reasons that clearly make it ineligible and that can't be easily repaired? If so, it's only going to fail again. Quick fail is probably appropriate. Is it nommed by a different person, or is it the same person not wanting to take no for an answer? Also things I'd think about. If it's a different person, I'd be more likely to explain over again what it lacks and give them a shot, since I wouldn't want to discourage people from making a legitimate effort to improve articles. If it's the same person, I'd be more likely to fail it. If they didn't fix it last time, there doesn't seem to be much reason to suppose they'll fix it now. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:19, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll ckeck over why it failed before, then make my decision. The person who it was the same person, by they haven't been back since they renominated it. Brambleclawx 19:48, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As you have commented on a report on AN/I in which I have been involved, I'd like to inform you that I have filed a sockpuppet investigation against UrukHaiLoR (talk · contribs). This account very likely is a sockpuppet of Top Gun (talk · contribs), who has been blocked indefinitely for "lying about sources, in addition to a whole host of other sins".
Thank you for your contribution to the discussion on the noticeboard! It would be really odd for an editor with 6000 edits (like me) to vandalize the administrators' noticeboard intentionally. Cs32en 03:06, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Indeed it would, but unfortunately that doesn't mean it couldn't happen. :/ I'm glad if you have located a sockpuppet. However, I am still of the opinion that the behavior around the issues in the article was problematic. If you are having problems with another contributor, it's better to seek assistance via dispute resolution before the situation escalates. With an article about to go DYK, I can understand that the situation might have seemed more urgent, but I suspect that you would also have found more input for the same reason from other contributors, perhaps at the content noticeboard? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Moonriddengirl: Since you have been involved in the topic of Chabad, this is to let you know that an official arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement. You may wish to add your comments for the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement/Evidence. The ArbCom asks that evidence be submitted within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Chabad movement/Workshop. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 05:55, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the notice, but, really, my sole involvement in this was moving it to a subpage. :) I'm not really familiar with the facts of the case. Hope it all resolves swiftly and well. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am not playing games anymore at this site. I will file a grievance against you if you make any more false accusations against me. I am requesting you remove that FAKE accusation you made that I "evaded a ban" - because I was NOT banned. Do NOT force me, because I WILL file a complaint against you. I am not going to tolerate harassment from you or anyone else.Wiki Greek Basketball (talk) 13:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- This comment is inappropriate. I have responded to your note at ANI and will not discuss this matter with you here. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:43, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I was wondering what was the outcome regarding the Wikiproject illustration, I noticed there is no activity, I have been thinking on starting a similar wikiproject but first I need to check that there is no similar wikiprojects like the one I have in mind. Let me know please ASAP. Thanks --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 20:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi. It was merged into Wikipedia:WikiProject Images and Media. It might be good to ask at the talk page what's being done in that area. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:15, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it seems you have the issue under control here, and someone has taken over at Commons. I'll not step in on this one at this time. As ever, you know where I am if I can be of any help. J Milburn (talk) 21:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't think that you can call that a copy. The introduction and the conclusion are mine and the section of the battle there are a few sentences that explain what happened again in my words. After all, for every article in Wikipedia there are existing books and articles used as a source generally the events that already happened can only be told with different words but generally describing the same thing. Instead of deleting the article you could have removed what you think is copied. --Gligan (talk) 21:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I have replied at your talk page. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:55, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, in fact that is what I did. When I rewrote it a few days ago, I greatly reduced the section for the battle because that is mainly a text translated from the source. And for example, how would you suggest to rewrite that sentence "After the heavy defeats...the Turks were in desperate need for weapons, munitions and food supplies". After all it is a fact that after the heavy defeats they need are in need for weapons, in what other way am I supposed to tell it?
- In any case, I will just write that this was a battle between Bulgarians and Turks and we were victorious. From where I can find the text so that I don't have to create again the same infobox and categories? --Gligan (talk) 22:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I have shortened and rewritten the article. Is it better that way? --Gligan (talk) 11:38, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Moonriddengirl. Thanks for directing us to WP:COPYVIO in this discussion over at WP:ANI. I have added it to my reading list. Thanks again! — SpikeToronto 01:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem. Copyright work is kind of what I do. To a scary amount of time. Actually, I prefer not to reflect on it. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I only hope that none of the advice I gave MoodFreak (talk) in that thread was incorrect. Would it be okay for me to mark the thread at ANI resolved? Or is that an Administrator-only function? Thanks! — SpikeToronto 05:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there,
Last week, I simply reposted most of the blanked items on the 6th (which is coming up fast). Any suggestions on how to handle what's not yet been cleared - leave it here and repost for a couple more weeks until they are cleared? Cheers, MLauba (talk) 11:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi. :) If the contributor was not the creator, let's just revert back to the last verifiably clean. If he was, maybe we can relist one more time. Alternatively, we can make a new stub, copying over whatever non-creative elements (infobox, els) there may be. I did that with one yesterday where I also copied over (with attribution) the lead, since I believe the leads have been usable. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:39, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speaking of that, Talk:Bull City Red/Temp on today's listing: compare it with this: I think Derek did a couple of very smart rewrites but this one I'm uncomfortable with. What do you think? MLauba (talk) 11:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I think it's an abridgment, aka as a derivative work. :/ I will explain that the structure of the original is protected by copyright laws as well as the language and ask him to work on it a bit more. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:57, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Moonriddengirl. In your edit here, you restored the indefblocked template. This places the page in Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages, meaning that it could be deleted thirty days after the block. Please replace that template with {{subst:Indef|Historical}}; this will place the page in Category:Blocked historical users, which is a more applicable category. Best, Cunard (talk) 06:47, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Morning. You inadvertently placed my page in the same category, which I find funny because it is so something I would do. :D (I've neutralized the category.) My note there is no longer necessary, as it's been confirmed that the contributor has e-mailed others and received a response from at least one. I'll just revert to the redirect that existed before my note. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. I tend to make formatting mistakes like that. I recently messed up WP:RFPP with this edit. ;) Cunard (talk) 21:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On today's listing: Henry Curtis-Bennett. How do we handle ODNB issues? And if the reporting user is to be believed, a CCI might be required there. Enjoy :) MLauba (talk) 11:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Typically, I track down a contributor who has access to ODNB. Another CCI from sources I can't check? Just what I needed. :/ I'm on it. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:51, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- As we say in French, "Bon Courage" :)
- And another case for which I'd like your opinion: Danish Landrace (sheep) from [3], listed at SCV on the 4th. Is the language used to describe the sheep race considered "factual" or can it be paraphrased more without hurting the species' description? MLauba (talk) 12:10, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It can and should be paraphrased more. I'm concerned not only with the taking of language (one sentence is reproduced verbatim, I see), but also with the retention of structure. I'll speak to the contributor and rewrite it myself. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:29, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- In regards to Bennett and Cockburn, I'll check them out this evening and confirm/deny any concerns. Thanks, Ironholds (talk) 13:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- As promised, here we are. Henry Curtis-Bennett is certainly over the line:
- ODNB: "born on 31 July 1879 at Brentwood in Essex, the son of Sir Henry Curtis-Bennett (1846–1913), chief metropolitan magistrate, and his wife, Emily Jane Hughes-Hallett (1855–1942), daughter of a Kent solicitor... He was educated at Radley College and Trinity College, Cambridge, where he won blues for cycling"
- Article: "was born at Brentwood, Essex, the son of Sir Henry Curtis-Bennett (1846–1913), Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, and his wife, Emily Jane, née Hughes-Hallett (1855–1942), daughter of a Kent solicitor. He was educated at Radley College and Trinity College, Cambridge"
- ODNB:"Curtis-Bennett was called to the bar by the Middle Temple in 1902 and appointed a KC in 1919 and a bencher in 1926"
- Article:"Curtis-Bennett was called to the bar by the Middle Temple in 1902 and appointed a KC in 1919 and a bencher in 1926."
- As is Cockburn:
- ODNB:". He was commissioned ensign in the 1st, afterwards the Grenadier Guards, on 9 May 1781, and in 1782 went to Gibraltar, where he was aide-de-camp to General Eliott during the siege"
- Article:"He was commissioned as an ensign in the 1st Regiment of Foot Guards on 9 May 1781, and in 1782 went to Gibraltar, where he was aide-de-camp to General Eliott during the Great Siege"
- ODNB:"For his services he was promoted captain-lieutenant in the 105th regiment in 1784, and transferred in 1785 to the 65th, then quartered in Dublin"
- Article:"For his services, he was promoted to captain lieutenant in the 105th Regiment of Foot in 1784, and transferred in 1785 to the 65th (2nd Yorkshire, North Riding) Regiment of Foot, then quartered in Dublin"
- Hope that helps. Regards, Ironholds (talk) 17:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem; as always, give me a poke if you've got any other ODNB violations. I also have access to a large journal store, so if you have some more academic copyvio suspicions, don't hesitate to contact me in that regard. Many thanks, Ironholds (talk) 17:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Moonriddengirl,
I think this might need an admin's attention: [4]. Please see other contribs by this user. Thanks. Malke2010 18:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, that's certainly worth looking into. :/ I'll wrap what I'm doing and come take a closer look. Thanks! --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Looking at his contributions and talk page, I think that it may be in hand. I see User:SarekOfVulcan, also an admin, has communicated with him, and I think others are interested in guiding him to work within process. I've left him an additional resource. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:23, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Very good. Thanks for being so quick. Hope things work out for him.Malke2010 18:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm part of the OTRS team, and we've received an email from a District of Columbia governmental agency saying that the text in this article was taken from a government website. It is my understanding that this would mean that the text was in the public domain, and wouldn't constitute a copyright infringement. Could you please let me know if this is true? That way I'll be able to let the person know how they should proceed. If it wasn't taken from a government website I will ask them to provide us with the relevant releases. Thank you. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 20:20, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, fellow OTRS team member. :) It's only public domain if its from a federal government website or from one of those states that does not claim copyright. The government of the District of Columbia is not federal, and it does not relinquish copyright, as per [5]: "United States and foreign copyright laws and international conventions protect the contents of the Site." That's also addressed in Wikipedia:Public domain: "The United States Copyright Office, in section 206.02(b), 206.02(c), and 206.02(d) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices, has stated its position that works of the U.S. Postal Service, of the government of the District of Columbia, or of the government of Puerto Rico are not "works of the U.S. government" and thus are subject to copyright." (It says so here.)
- I hate it when we get gov material that isn't federal, because it can lead to quite a bit of running around as I try to determine if it's from one of those gov sites we can use. :/ I don't think we can accept this one without the relevant release. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:27, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you so much. That's incredibly useful. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 20:29, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Any time. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:38, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I was wondering if you knew of a correct way on Wikipedia to cite the liner notes from a music album? As I think you know, I'm working on cleaning up the article on Phil Collen, and it would be an immense help if I could use information from Def Leppard's various albums as references. Thanks. C628 (talk) 02:11, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi. There's a template for citing them: {{Cite album-notes}}. Basically, I'd use them like any self-published source connected to the subject, to add detail but not to verify extraordinary claims. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 02:31, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. I read those over, and I'll try to work on the article some more in the next few days. C628 (talk) 02:48, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Moonriddengirl,
How do you see this developing? Do you think I should resign my admin bit?
--Richard S (talk) 18:47, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I've answered at your talk. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:59, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This was vandalism to a couple of articles from a new account, but if it is genuine, do I raise it at ANI with links or try to get the diffs removed somehow?
Thanks Dougweller (talk) 19:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- See WP:Oversight. LeadSongDog come howl 19:12, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Just what I was going to say. :D Except with a lot more words, as usual. Depending on what it was, oversight is probably best. Arbitration determined that "Users who appear to be children editing in good faith who disclose identifying personal information may be appropriately counseled. Deletion and oversight may be used in appropriate cases to remove the information." --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. I've emailed oversight. Nice to get a quick response! Dougweller (talk) 19:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Deleted, plus another. Moonridden, any chance you good give her some counselling? User talk:Luiseanna09 Dougweller (talk) 19:30, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Sure, although I may need to figure out what kind of edits she was making when she placed this stuff. Let me wrap up this copyright thing, and I'll take a look. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:33, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. One edit was details about her age, family, town where she lived, boyfriend, the other was about the boy that she said was 9 (her name and his name were in the edits). It could be a hoax but I've got no reason to think it is. No address or phone number. Dougweller (talk) 19:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Best to treat it like it's serious, just in case. I've left her a note. We'll see what happens. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:58, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I saw that, I knew you'd do a better job than I would! The oversighter was on her cell so it would have been difficult. I've joined in on that Admin's page as you may have seen. He really should resign. He doesn't do much and got the bit when it was easy to get. Dougweller (talk) 20:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I think you'd have done a fine job (your welcome was nice), but my username may be reassuring, especially if her mom & dad come online. :D (OTOH, maybe we should be trying to teach her that people named Moonriddengirl could actually look like.... Well, I was looking for a file of a scary old man, but unless he's a dead scary old man, that would be a BLP issue anyway. You get my point. :) As for the other part, thanks. I think that would be the most low-drama way to proceed and probably best all around. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Don't know what to make of this [6]. Can something be done to help?Malke2010 22:11, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That kind of thing, unfortunately, requires police intervention. There's nothing we can do within Wikipedia without some indication of who is involved, because there really is, literally, nothing we can do. :/ All we'd be able to do is block somebody if it turned out they were on Wiki (per Wikipedia:Harassment#Off-wiki harassment). Not a good idea to delete such correspondence, but the impulse is understandable. If they were stored on his computer, they may still be retrievable (though don't ask me how; I'm not remotely techy and only know what I'm told); if they were stored remotely (such as by his e-mail provider), he might be able to get them back. Likely the best thing you can do at this point is to minimize attendant drama. If this is just some bully who gets his jollies off on bugging people, then bluster is going to be a lot of fun for him. I think you could support him best by being friendly, but focusing on Wiki activities while online. Via e-mail, of course, anything goes. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC
- Yes, I can see this requires something beyond wikipedia. Agree with best means of support suggestions. I'm not techy either, but I imagine these things could be retrieved. Thanks for the suggestions, they're good ones, as always. :) Malke2010 22:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It seems as you are the person who started discussion about (copyright)?
To be honeyst this original version of article about Karl Tõnisson and The international conference „Buddhism and Nordland as other pieces what I used hier in wiki is written by me.
So what?
And the conference "Buddhism and Nordlandand" as a project were started by me years ago.
And now ,ll be the queation from my side ,,,whats wrong with this?
DO I need any copyright hier in wikipedia to share my own nformation what,s written by me?
Sorry if I got it wrong.
--VanemTao (talk) 00:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|