User talk: Diannaa

 Skip to the bottom  ⇩  ·

Talk page archive
Send me no flowers
List Archive 1 Nov 2009–June 2010 Archive 2 July–October 2010 Archive 3 October–Nov 2010 Archive 4 November 2010 Archive 5 December 2010 Archive 6 January–Feb 2011 Archive 7 Feb–March 2011 Archive 8 March–April 2011 Archive 9 April–May 2011 Archive 10 May–June 2011 Archive 11 June–July 2011 Archive 12 July–August 2011 Archive 13 August–Oct 2011 Archive 14 October–Dec 2011 Archive 15 Jan–Feb 2012 Archive 16 Feb–March 2012 Archive 17 April 2012 Archive 18 May–June 2012 Archive 19 June–July 2012 Archive 20 July 2012 Archive 21 August–September 2012 Archive 22 September–October 2012 Archive 23 November 2012 Archive 24 December 2012 Archive 25 January 2013 Archive 26 February–March 2013 Archive 27 April–May 2013 Archive 28 June–July 2013 Archive 29 August–September 2013 Archive 30 October–December 2013 Archive 31 January–February 2014 Archive 32 March–April 2014 Archive 33 May–June 2014 Archive 34 July–August 2014 Archive 35 September–October 2014 Archive 36 November–December 2014 Archive 37 January–February 2015 Archive 38 March 2015 Archive 39 April–May 2015 Archive 40 June–July 2015 Archive 41 August–September 2015 Archive 42 October–November 2015 Archive 43 December 2015 Archive 44 January–February 2016 Archive 45 March–April 2016 Archive 46 May–June 2016 Archive 47 July–August 2016 Archive 48 September–October 2016 Archive 49 November–December 2016 Archive 50 January–February 2017 Archive 51 March–April 2017 Archive 52 May–June 2017 Archive 53 July–August 2017 Archive 54 September–October 2017 Archive 55 November–December 2017 Archive 56 January–February 2018 Archive 57 March–April 2018 Archive 58 May–June 2018 Archive 59 July–August 2018 Archive 60 September–October 2018 Archive 61 November–December 2018 Archive 62 January–February 2019 Archive 63 March–April 2019 Archive 64 May–June 2019 Archive 65 July–August 2019 Archive 66 September–October 2019 Archive 67 November–December 2019 Archive 68 January–February 2020 Archive 69 March–April 2020 Archive 70 May–June 2020 Archive 71 July–August 2020 Archive 72 September–October 2020 Archive 73 November–December 2020 Archive 74 January–February 2021 Archive 75 March–April 2021 Archive 76 May–June 2021 Archive 77 July–August 2021 Archive 78 September–October 2021 Archive 79 November–December 2021 Archive 80 January–February 2022 Archive 81 March–April 2022 Archive 82 May–June 2022 Archive 83 July–August 2022 Archive 84 September–October 2022 Archive 85 November–December 2022 Archive 86 January–February 2023 Archive 87 March–April 2023 Archive 88 May–June 2023 Archive 89 July–August 2023 Archive 90 September–October 2023 Archive 91 November–December 2023 Archive 92 January–February 2024 Archive 93 March–April 2024 Archive 94 May–June 2024 Archive 95 July–August 2024 Archive 96 September–October 2024 Archive 97 November–December 2024

Hi Diannaa,

Thanks for your note about my major edits on Professor Georgina Long's page. However, I don't believe the content I included in my re-write infringed on any source's copyright. It was original content that Professor Long and I had worked on together so that her page would reflect an up-to-date biography and summary of her personal life, career achievements, sporting achievements and awards. She provided almost all of the content.

I will attempt another edit and include an edit summary to explain changes as perhaps that was the issue.

Thanks.

Sitalia1990 (talk) 23:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sitalia1990, some of the content matched material already published online at https://www.melanoma.org.au/about-the-institute/our-team/. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder or have their permission, unless special documentation is in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

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

Regarding sourcing: Each piece of information that you add to Wikipedia needs a citation to a reliable source. Please see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons for details about our policy on biographies of living persons, including what is considered appropriate sources for this class of articles. — Diannaa (talk) 23:31, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa,

I see that you reverted my edit to Peter Sutcliffe (the information on victim Ann Rooney) claiming that it was a copyright violation from execulink, then left me a warning on my talk page – the first of which I have ever gotten in my 19 years as an active editor. I did not copy word for word the information from the reference. I used the reference as a source and paraphrased. If that paraphrasing was a little to close to the original, fine. But, to claim I outright committed a copyright violation isn't the case. ExRat (talk) 00:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While you did paraphrase the material a little, I still had to remove quite a bit of content that was identical to the source webpage. That's a violation of our copyright policy. — Diannaa (talk) 00:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those plot summaries were copied, but with some edits. 86.129.82.17 (talk) 21:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The edits were not enough to prevent it being a violation of our copyright policy. — Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So what would I have to do to prevent it being a copyright violation? 86.129.82.17 (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Watch the episodes. Then, write your own plot descriptions. That's what I did at Queer Eye (2018 TV series) for example. — Diannaa (talk) 20:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Diannaa, This is Performer Researcher. I worked on the page for Marc Douglas Berardo. I added some additional references. I added to the description, radio and recognition. If you have any guidance on how I can ensure that this page will not be deleted that would be great. I also added the new singles to his track listings.

I received a message about copyright on a record I added The Beauty Of This Now and I think also on a very old track. I can't figure out why for Further On Tomorrow. Thank you so much.

If you help me with those issues, I would appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Performer Research (talk • contribs) 23:32, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was a paragraph that matched content found here. Please don't copy prose directly from your sources, — Diannaa (talk) 23:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi There,

You left a note on my page claiming I copied material from a link that you provided but did not work. This is incorrect. Instead, I went to the German version of the Ernst Roehm page, and did my own translation of his time in Bolivia which is sorely lacking. It is my own translation of information that doesn't exist on English Wikipedia. Just clarifying! Happy editing! Jjazz76 (talk) 03:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 11:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you "removed" what I had already deleted as not relevant (the copyrighted material), but I cannot fully check as I cannot see the change from the prior version. It was added by someone who does not have expertise in tribology, see the talk section just above yours at User_talk:Lfstevens. Ldm1954 (talk) 02:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed some content copied from https://newatlas.com/materials/superlubricity-friction-machines/. It was the paragraph starting with "To get it to work...". The revisions containing the copyright material were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that's why you can't access them any more. — Diannaa (talk) 03:05, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That material should not have been in the article in any case as it has zero relevance. I have removed some more nonsense from the article, which really needs a TNT. Ldm1954 (talk) 08:11, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hi Diannaa,

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

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

Hi Diannaa,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hello Dianaa,

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

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

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

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

HI Diannaa,

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

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

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

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

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

Your opinion about best way to move forward is appreciated.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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