User talk: Diannaa

 Skip to the bottom  ⇩  ·

Content removed based on copyright Rdenney

Greetings - I saw this notice of removal: remove copyright content copied from https://traviscountyhistorical.blogspot.com/2021/02/who-were-indigenous-tribes.html

I'm actually OK w/ that, although curious why it was a copyright problem given I wrote the article? I actually added that because someone previously had referenced Tonkawas, but didn't even know how to spell the name. There were certainly more tribes in the Austin area than Tonkawas, and in relation to El Camino there were other tribes more likely utilizing that trail.

Anyway, I'm ok w/ the omission, was just trying to improve upon someone's previous entry. rdenney (talk) 02:36, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@Rdenney: You may own the copyright but we still do not. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:25, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that clarification. So what's the proper way to treat these situations? Just avoid simple cut and paste?

Also, second question, I know there is a warning about use of blogger as a citation; for better or worse that is Travis County Historical Commission's mechanism for writing articles. Advice on how to address this? rdenney (talk) 12:31, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

In order to use the prose from the blog, we need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have given permission for the material to be copied to this website and have released the content under a compatible license. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. A second point: Citing your own blog (or any blog for that matter) is not a good idea; they are not typically considered as reliable sources. It would be better to write some new content specifically for Wikipedia, using sources other than the blog itself as citations. — Diannaa (talk) 12:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Ukrainian Insurgent Army war against Russian occupation

Glad to see you are working on Nazis

This is related. [1]. (At least some members of the group collaborated with Germans in Poland; extent is controversial, but that is not the point.) I was coming in to ask you if you thought that all was well here.

I have had to take a break from the page and don’t want to intervene if the outcome is satisfactory. However, the reason for my concern is that the editor who is enforcing copyright is rather new, and the two who are tag-teaming her are the reason why I am having to take a break from the page. Marcelus seems to be editing in good faith, if possibly insufficient attention to copyright. Elinruby (talk) 22:33, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

A complex case like this should be listed at WP:CP, not on my talk page. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 19:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

2 possible copyvio questions for you

I have 2 copyvio questions for you on the "Ukrainian Insurgent Army war against Russian occupation" article here [2]. One of the two, (Revision 1085767592) is a bit more complicated because: 1) the editor will not cite the source he/she used, and 2) the editor reverted back his/her edit that contains the possible copyvio. When I first noticed it, I posted my concerns on the Talk Page & simultaneously replaced revision 1085767592. I have no idea if either are copyvio but I do have concerns they may be. Since I got nowhere on the Talk Page with the first one, I decided it's best if I ask you about both of them.

1st. Revision 1086035660 (here [3] I noticed this one this morning.

In late 1939, Nazi Germany accommodated OUN leaders in the city of Kraków, the capital of the General Government in the German-occupied portion of Poland.

From source: (page 74) in 'archives.gov' "Hitlers Shadow" link here [4]. .

In late 1939 the Germans housed OUN leaders in the city of Kraków, the capital of the General Government in the German-occupied portion of Poland.

2nd. (More complicated one) Revision 1085767592 (here [5].) 1. Does not cite sources and 2. has possible copyvio in 8 sentences. This is the one I brought up on the Talk Page. Link to Talk Page [6]). On that talk page, I compared the wording in Revision 1085767592 to the uncited sources used & underlined what I felt are copyvio. Rather than me cluttering your talk page, I thought it'd be best if you just go to that talk page to see what I'm talking about. Thank you & best regards, BetsyRMadison (talk) 15:12, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

P.S. For your convenience, here's the link [7] to what I replaced Revision 1085767592 with. And here's the link [8] to the editor's revert/revision edit. In this revert/revision, in sentence 4, the editor only swapped words around from their earlier revision (1085767592). No other changes were made in any of the other sentences. Also in this revert/revision, they still didn't include their sources. BetsyRMadison (talk) 15:39, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@Diannaa - The source says:

In late 1939 the Germans housed OUN leaders in Krakow, then the capital of the German-occupied General Government. -->[9] (page 74)

Not what they falsely claim above:

In late 1939 the Germans housed OUN leaders in the city of Kraków, the capital of the General Government in the German-occupied portion of Poland.

It would be nice if BetsyRMadison was more careful editing this topic area, they make constant mistakes -->[10] - GizzyCatBella🍁 17:20, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

A complex case like this should be listed at WP:CP, not on my talk page. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 19:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

It would be nice if you didn't spam the nice lady's user page with aspersions. Diannaa I just stopped by to let you know that I ran earwhig and that looked pretty good; does that mean that Betsy probably got everything? I was trying to help her when I asked about this. Thank you for the link; I will use it next time I have a concern. 12:00, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Earwig's tool likely won't detect aterial copied from books.— Diannaa (talk) 13:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Lyrics revdel, if you would be so kind

[11] I assume they still get whacked even if they're on a talk page? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 00:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. If User talk:Drmies is ANI 2.0, your talk page is Copyright problems noticeboard 2.0. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:56, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

History of opium in China

Hello Diannaa! I had modified some content in that article so that it wouldn't violate copyright criteria, but you still deleted it due to copyright issues. Can you demonstrate some questions to me? It will be better if you also provide some solutions here. Thanks for helping.--波斯波莉斯 (talk) 02:40, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

It sounds like you are looking for some advice as to how to write for Wikipedia.

Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Paraphrase: Write It in Your Own Words. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study this module aimed at WikiEd students.— Diannaa (talk) 12:49, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again for your meaningful and constructive suggestions! By your review, I find that I had ignored problems of slight plagiarism and structure. And I also omit former content to a new summary as follows:

According to J Marshall, Chongqing also regard opium as a key commodity in the smuggling from KMT controlled zone including Sichuan and Yunnan to Japanese occupied zone for compensating urgent government expeditions and military costing during protracted war era. To raise necessary revenue, Chongqing also permitted Shanghai Green Gang leader Du Yuesheng possessing many connections with Japanese controlled territory to manage opium smuggling business. Du's operation was under general Taili who took charge of anti-smuggling bureau’s supervision.

Former content: Opium was a key commodity in the smuggling trade because of its high value per unit of weight. The Chongqing government authorized Du Yue-sheng (under Tai Li'supervision) to take charge of opium smuggling in order to raise vitally needed revenues. The Nationalists shipped opium from Sichuan and Yunnan to his agents for sale in Japanese-held territories.(Much of this opium returned in the form of heroin.) When the Japanese seized Hong Kong, Macao, and other coastal ports in 1941, Du moved inland but continued to manage the opium trade to these newly occupied territories. (For more specific information, see Opium and the Politics of Gangsterism in Nationalist China, 1927–1945 page 24 [12])

Please check the new one.— 波斯波莉斯 (talk) 04:15, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

The new version is okay from a copyright point of view. It's difficult to read and understand though.— Diannaa (talk) 12:04, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Huawei

I paraphrased from those sources, as opposed to directly copying from them. Do you mind restoring the draft to my talk page so I can continue working on it? FobTown (talk) 14:01, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry but we can't host copyright content anywhere on Wikipedia, not even in sandboxes or on user talk pages. By the way it's not a draft - it's a mainspace article.— Diannaa (talk) 14:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Response to Speedy deletion of Draft:Jorge Rigamonti

Hi Dianna, I had inferred that the content on the page https://www.behance.net/Rigamonti/resume was under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC BY-SA) since other pages of Jorge Rigamonti's website on https://www.behance.net/Rigamonti indicated that the text was under that license. After you raised the issue, I raised it with the author and the page https://www.behance.net/Rigamonti/resume now clearly states in the "Sources" section: "Text in this page is co-licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) (unversioned)." Based on that, could you undo the deletion of the Draft:Jorge Rigamonti page I had written? It took me a while to translate and paraphrase information from various sources so I would really appreciate if the Draft:Jorge Rigamonti could be reinstated with its full content. Thank you and regards, Archifibonacci (talk) 14:13, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

I have restored the draft and added the required attribution. The fact that you've been in contact with the subject of the draft leads me to believe you may have a conflict of interest. I've placed some info regarding that on your talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 14:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Diannaa for restoring the Draft:Jorge Rigamonti page. I have reviewed the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest page and confirm that there is no conflict of interest in my case. For some sections I extracted information from the website https://www.behance.net/Rigamonti/resume which was put together by family members of Jorge Rigamonti as indicated in it. There is a contact email in that page. However, that website is not the only source I used as indicated in the references of the Draft:Jorge Rigamonti page. Archifibonacci (talk) 18:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Simplicissimus & Copyright

As far as I can ascertain File:What Does Hitler Look Like?.png in 2023 shall fall under the ambit of the more-than-70-years rule (for which there are various templates). I had been under the impression, despite not knowing German, that Simplicissimus as a whole was in the public domain. So does this source deserve a seven-decade rolling project of image release into the Creative Commons, or what? I can't be the only editor not conversant with the intricacies of Germany copyright law, and as a practical matter I don't want to put anything up on Wikipedia that doesn't stick. Thanks! kencf0618 (talk) 03:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Kencf0618. The uploader did not put any license template on the upload, and I don't think it's a valuable image for us to keep, so I am not interested in investigating its copyright status. If you wish to do so, the place to start is the Hirtle chart.— Diannaa (talk) 03:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Owais Al-Qarni's new articles

Few days back you warned Owais for adding copyrighted material to Wikipedia, he continues doing so, by creating articles full of copyrighted material. Please have a look at Muslims in India (book) and Seerat-i-Sayyid Ahmad Shaheed ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 08:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

This is not a violation of the copyright policy, as it's quotations. Excessive quotations removed. — Diannaa (talk) 13:56, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I had already removed the copyrighted text, and left the attributed quotations. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 14:48, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

The editor copied compatibly licensed text, and provided the legally required attribution. You should not have removed it. He did everything right.— Diannaa (talk) 21:45, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I have restored the missing content and tweeked the attribution to make it more obvious.— Diannaa (talk) 21:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I feel I missed the attribution case, because I didn't find it explicit. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 04:08, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

Lative case

Hello Diannaa. The source I was referring to in the article about the lative case was published under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license (CC BY-SA 3.0), as stated on page 2 of said source. As far as I understand, it means that it can be freely copied onto Wikipedia. Hopefully my additions can be restored. Thanks in advance, Amtin (talk) 15:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I have restored the content. We have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that we copied the prose rather than wrote it ourselves. It's also required under the terms of the license. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. Sorry for the mistake.— Diannaa (talk) 21:39, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 22:36, 14 May 2022 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 22:36, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done— Diannaa (talk) 22:43, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Doubts regarding Khuda Bakhsh's Wikipedia page

Hello Mam, Some of the sources like the official website of the Khuda Bakhsh Oriental Public Library are available under Public Domain since it is a Government website. Anyone can use it for their references under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The same applies to the Ministry of Culture, Government of India's dedicated page for Khuda Bakhsh Library that contains the details about the same. I have the permission to use those contents from the website and some of the Khuda Bakhsh's Wikipedia page has contents that were deleted due to the Copy/Paste of the exact words from the website.

Since I have copy-pasted some of the sentences as I wanted to make the Person's Page more Authentic. I will re-write the sentences with my own words to avoid Copyright - Violations and will give the references which are available in Public Domain. So, is it fine mam if I do that? Syed Sadique Hussain (talk) 05:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Actually, government works in India are protected by copyright for sixty years from publication date. See commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/India; https://copyright.gov.in/documents/copyrightrules1957.pdf. Regardless, the places where I found the content include the BBC website, the Times of India, and others. (Not government websites.) It's okay to use your sources as sources of information, but don't copy the text. Cite your sources. — Diannaa (talk) 13:54, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Cake for you!

Hey Diannaa, I hope you're doing well right now. Here's a cake Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 20:08, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Moneytrees! So delicious — Diannaa (talk) 23:55, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Tamilnad Christian Council

Re. Speedy deletion - of course you were right. But I was so happy finding a meaningful presentation that I just (re-)acted... I´ll try once more adhering to the rules. Is it possible to look once more at the deleted text, please? Verbum (talk) 16:51, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

I can send you the deleted text via email if you like, but you will have to activate your Wikipedia email first. — Diannaa (talk) 19:43, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

For you

	Prime "Copyright infringement detective" par excellence
	At times it's quite surprising to see what you can detect. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 23:59, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the postive feedback!— Diannaa (talk) 01:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi need help

Previously i created a page name Divya krishnan and it was deleted by you can i recreated tat page again or can you help me recreating the page again

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abidn2 (talk • contribs) 05:53, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I am not the person who deleted it, as far as I can tell. I did find a deletion discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Divya Krishnan, so I suggest you start a new draft in draft space. See Wikipedia:Drafts for details of how to do that.— Diannaa (talk) 23:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Restore

Hi, please restore Al-Baas Al-Islami in my user page or send me in email. I want to work on this article. - Owais ^Talk 15:53, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I am not the person who deleted it. That's who you need to speak to. (it was user:Deb. — Diannaa (talk) 23:29, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Leonidas J. Guibas

Possible copyvio [13]. Would you mind having a look? Dr.Pinsky (talk) 19:21, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 14:03, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Probably copywrite infringement at Pachygyria

Hello Diannaa, I removed a portion of Pachygyria which was a large paragraph copy-pasted from a medical journal, which was also written in an inappropriate tone for Wikipedia. I am requesting you to look into it, and do revision deletion if necessary. You can see my comments in Talk:Pachygyria#Removed_inappropriate_section, but I already removed the probably-infringing material from my own comments on the Talk page after I looked up the policy. I am concerned this deletion will be reverted if revision deletion is not carried out, since it was already reverted about 2 seconds after I deleted it. Somebody restored the infringing material for no apparent reason. Thank you for your help. 2601:441:4400:1740:A18B:5282:CC9F:9030 (talk) 02:59, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the report. I won't be doing revision deletion though, since we've had the content since 2007.— Diannaa (talk) 14:03, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Copyvio in Bareilly

Hi, I came across this ancient copyvio in Bareilly, History of Bareilly and Bareilly via "Conybeare, p. 677" footnote. The footnote and related text are copied from here. Since this is such an old copyvio intermixed with other text, I am ill equipped to deal with it. Can you please take a look? Many thanks. Renata•3 00:13, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

? The purported source paper is dated January 2016, at which point we already have the content for many years. So it looks like the author of that paper copied from us rather than the other way around.— Diannaa (talk) 00:43, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

It's very weird how the live link is presented on UPenn website. It's a PDF of 2016 Internet Archive copy, but the original webpage dates back to at least May 2007. Renata•3 01:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Regardless, I checked back as far as 2012 on Bareilly and the content was already there. There's no way I am doing revision deletion on 10 years or more worth of edits. They do need to be cleaned though, but an admin is not the only person who can do that step.— Diannaa (talk) 02:33, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi

Getting my bearings on Wikipedia once again. Much has changed since the last time I visited; many folks I've searched up don't seem to edit much (or at all) anymore. Glad to see that you're still helping keep the lights on :) /wiae /tlk 03:04, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, welcome back, good to see you :)— Diannaa (talk) 12:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Ovation (American TV channel)

Same COPYVIO edit's back here; reverted them already. Nate • (chatter) 00:27, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Another admin has dealt with this case. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 00:48, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Saw it, glad it's handled! :) Nate • (chatter) 00:52, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Copyvios and apparent self-promotion

Hi Diannaa, please see Seigneur for an addition I reverted and which I've tagged as a copyvio, and which were totally unrelated to th article's topic. The IP user also added a photo to this article and to several others, which I've also removed. I'm just letting you know in case there's any blowback from my deletions. Thanks as always. BilCat (talk) 07:44, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi BilCat, sorry for the delay in replying. The article has already been dealt with by another admin. I have nominated the image for deletion, it appears elsewhere online. — Diannaa (talk) 21:03, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again! I should have thought to check for the photo online too, but it was pretty late for me. BilCat (talk) 23:11, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse question

Hi Diannaa. Would you mind taking a look at WP:THQ#Should 2 really long obituaries be included in a biography article, word-for-word?? It appears the content was added a couple of years ago. If it just needs rewriting, then perhaps revedeleting won't be necessary. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:21, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly. I wouldn't do revision deletion for this, for two reasons: (1) The content was framed as 2 quotations, with block quote templates. Hence not a copyvio per se; (2) We are no longer doing huge revision deletions that span many years/many diffs/ many editors' contributions.— Diannaa (talk) 20:57, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for looking at this. Another admin (Nthep) went in a removed the problematic content and also explained about (2). I think any other issues can be resolved via normal editing from here on. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:05, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

q

Hi--is it worth deleting a couple hundred edits for this? Thanks... Drmies (talk) 16:23, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

No, I would not do so.— Diannaa (talk) 20:20, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Gerlin Bean

Hello! You deleted the section on Women and the British Black Power Movement on the British Black Panthers main page. You kindly gave lots of reasons why it was not acceptable. I can see from reading this page that you are a copyright specialist so I would like to learn from the comments. Is it possible for you to send me the deleted text somehow so I can see how to apply your comments to that text? I did not use any visuals and I did not copy another wikipedia page so I am unsure why you sent me info on that. But I am sure the paraphrasing part is something I need to learn so that I can rewrite the section to pass muster at my second attempt. Balance person (talk) 17:07, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Balance Person! I have sent you the removed section via email. The message I posted on your talk page is a template, and it's pretty comprehensive, so some of the material does not apply to your addition. You might try comparing the source document with your proposed text using an online tool such as https://app.copyleaks.com/text-compare. The place I found the matching content was https://lwbooks.co.uk/leading-women-of-the-black-radical-movement.

General advice: Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Paraphrase: Write It in Your Own Words. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study this module aimed at WikiEd students.— Diannaa (talk) 20:27, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks very much for sending the text and also for the leads for me to study. All extremely helpful. Thanks! Balance person (talk) 21:04, 21 May 2022 (UTC)