User talk:Sphilbrick

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


March 2019 at Women in Red[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg
March 2019, Volume 5, Issue 3, Numbers 107, 108, 112, 113


Happy Women's History Month from Women in Red!

AF Logo+Mark 1.png
Visible Wiki Women campaign official logo.png
Map-Francophonie organisation en.svg

Please join us for these virtual events:
March: Art+Feminism & #VisibleWikiWomen
Geofocus: Francophone Women
Continuing initiatives: Suffrage #1day1woman


Other ways you can participate:
Help us plan our future events: Ideas Cafe
Join the conversations on our talkpage
Follow us on Twitter: @wikiwomeninred
Subscription options: English language opt-in International opt-in Unsubscribe
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Precious anniversary[edit]

Precious
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:57, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Talk pages consultation 2019[edit]

The Wikimedia Foundation has invited the various Wikimedia communities, including the English Wikipedia, to participate in a consultation on improving communication methods within the Wikimedia projects. As such, a request for comment has been created at Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019. You are invited to express your views in the discussion. ~ Winged BladesGodric 05:22, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 32[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library

Bookshelf.jpg

Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019

  • #1Lib1Ref
  • New and expanded partners
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:30, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

So sorry[edit]

I'm so sorry to hear that – my heartfelt condolences! You are sorely missed, of course. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:26, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

So sorry for your loss. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:22, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank-you for your kind thoughts.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:21, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2019[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
    • paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
    • checkuser-en-wp@wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

SECOR copyright removal[edit]

Hey, I just saw you deleted all my edits to the SECOR satellite page for "Copyright Reasons". Please give the previous version a reading, as I used several other sources beyond the one you cite for copyright infringement. I think you should only delete the pertinent parts and not the whole article. Also, maybe consider in the future posting to the talk page to resolve the issue. That would have been much better. An out of the blue deletion of several hours of my time comes out as way too harsh for a friendly community.

Marianoberna (talk) 03:50, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

PS: I forgot to mention, even though some of the text was copied and pasted, this was just the start and I planned on extensively rewriting to merge all the sources into a seamless article.

Marianoberna (talk) 03:54, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Mariano. While Wikipedia articles can be composed iteratively, copyrighted material cannot be lifted like that. I compared the two articles, and most of the text was from Gunter's. In any event, your version is not gone -- merely reverted. You can work on putting the text in your own words in the sandbox or a text file and then post it when it's ready. :) --Neopeius (talk) 04:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Marianoberna, I don't have much to add beyond the comments of Neopeius, but I will note that many new editors understand that the current version of an article cannot include (except for limited use of quotes) copyrighted material, but do not fully appreciate that our restrictions on the use of copyrighted material applies to all prior versions of articles. If you must start with copyrighted material, you need to do so in an off-line editor. (Even that is not a best practice, as it is technically possible to take copyrighted text and change literally every single word and still violate copyright. a better practice is to have multiple sources of information, read the mall and then summarize the key points in your own words as a new document.) S Philbrick(Talk) 15:34, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

SECOR issues[edit]

Hello! Thank you for catching the lifts from Gunter's Space Page. I apologize for not catching that. Is there a tool I can use to find copyrighted text? --Neopeius (talk) 04:28, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Neopeius, There are a number of tools listed in the Copyright section of my user page: User:Sphilbrick#Copyright, but Earwig is a good option. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:40, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind[edit]

[1] 78.28.54.83 (talk) 17:50, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm a bit puzzled, because I copied some templated text I've used many times in the past. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:59, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Aha, I just figured it out. It was templated text, but I usually use it in OTRS replies, so did not need the nowiki code there. Thanks again. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:01, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Southern[edit]

Hi,

On the NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Tournament bids by school page, the first reference is to the NCAA reference book which I updated prior to the start of the tournament. On page 122 of the book lists all the teams that have made the tournament along with appearances and vacated appearances (pg. 126).

Roberto221 (talk) 21:29, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Roberto221, Thanks for the extremely prompt response, and thanks for providing a very solid source.
(As an aside, I'm very familiar with that source. If you check the acknowledgments page, unnumbered but apparently page 2, you will see my name.)
However, I'm not sure the issue is yet settled. It is quite clear that something happened with Southern, and their official record for 2010 in the NCAA tournament is 0–1. while I don't know what they did to force a vacating of their appearance, if you glance up to page 125, you'll see that they are listed as having four appearances. There is a hashtag next to the name which leads to the information on page 126, so it looks to me like the official record say they appeared in the 2010 tournament, but have a record of 0–1 in that tournament. If you agree, this would mean that we should say that their appearance this year is the fifth, and the most recent is 2010, perhaps with an asterisk or hashtag with a footnote explaining the situation.
If you disagree, we can bring it up at the basketball wiki project and look for a consensus. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:50, 16 March 2019 (UTC)


What usually happens is that the NCAA erases all mention of that appearance, even though history says they made the tournament. Also, the school has to pay back the money they received from the tournament. That's how it works on the men's side, so I'm pretty sure it also applies to the women. If you look on the bottom of page 126, the heading says "#Official NCAA Tournament Records" so the NCAA has applied its sanctions on the team. If you want to add a footnote to the table, I'm fine with that, just mention that they vacated their last appearance in 2010.

Roberto221 (talk) 22:04, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Roberto221, Except that they clearly haven't " erases all mention of that appearance" because the entry on page 125 is:
#Southern U. (2002-04-06-10) 4 4 0 4 0.0 0 0 0
That entry lists the four appearances including the 2010 appearance and the first four after the parentheses is in the column for number of appearances. It looks to me like the NCAA rule is to say that if an appearance is vacated, you get no credit for any wins if you happen to win, but you can say that you appeared in the tournament.
The same situation seems to apply to Memphis. Their entry is:
#Memphis (1982-85-87-95-96-97-98) 7 9 2 7 22.2 0 0 0
Their 1985 results were vacated (although that doesn't seem to have much effect because their actual record was 0–1) but 1985 is listed in the parenthetical list of appearances, and is one of the appearances counted in the entry in the appearances column whose value is seven. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:15, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Nevermind, I guess I should've read on. I see that the footnote has revised official NCAA tournament records for Memphis and Southern showing the number of appearances as six and three respectively. I still want to get clarification on whether Wikipedia should simply show the official NCAA records, or show the actual results (in actuality they did make an appearance) and add a footnote explaining the vacating of an appearance. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:19, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Check to see what they've done on the men's side. There's a whole lot of men's programs that had to have vacated appearances. I also updated their reference book before the tournament started.

Roberto221 (talk)

Requesting urgent help[edit]

Hi,

Just a while ago I completed my second article on Wikipedia namely Aurat_March - a Women's Day related article. while I was amidst to make correction and review request on various Wikipedia women projects. Some one has placed speedy deletion notice on the article for perceived copyright issue.

While most of the places I have tried to write in my own language, some of the third person statements reported by news portals may still need little corrections. While personally I do not think that is a serious copyright issue which can not be dealt with little more paraphrasing. But frankly I do not know how to deal with situation. Please help me either in necessary update or help me in transferring it to my sandbox page.

Bookku (talk) 13:09, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Bookku, I was actually hoping you might contact me.
A substantial portion of the article is copied from:
http://www.aboardthedemocracytrain.com/instep-today-aurat-march-2018-freedom-over-fear
Specifically, this edit
I will not move this into a sandbox as we do not permit copyright violations anywhere — not in mainspace not in draft space not on user pages and not even in sandboxes. I see that the article has not yet been deleted so you are free to remove the copyright problem.
If it happens to get deleted before you have a chance to email you a copy of the contents.
Thanks for your interest in writing a substantial article about this important event but it must be done without violating our copyright policies. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:47, 17 March 2019 (UTC)


Thanks for your valuable guidance. I think as such a good part of wording is being used from a common press release , and so one might find same info in multiple media. A good part of article developed by me is information of facts, most places I already tried to change paraphrasing in my own words.

Right now as suggested by another user I will do re paraphrasing one more time off line & post it again. Until on safer side the other user has removed most content. Will work accordingly Thanks & regards Bookku (talk) 02:53, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Bookku, It is a common assumption that material found in a press release can be used without fear of copyright concerns. On the one hand, the entire point of the press release is to disseminate some information as widely as possible, so it is quite plausible to assume that the developers of such language would be pleased rather than upset to find their word spread widely, and may even be thrilled to find them used in a Wikipedia article. However, there are two problems with this. Despite the general interest to have this information disseminated widely, it is almost never the case the creators of a press release provide an acceptable license. The material is almost always implicitly and often explicitly subject to copyright. The second issue is that a press release is virtually always written from the point of view of the subject with an interest in betraying the subject as positively as possible. That's perfectly understandable but that's inconsistent with the goal of Wikipedia which is to write a neutral exposition. S Philbrick(Talk) 11:36, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Pl have look now[edit]

Hi, I changed language of intro part of article Aurat March substantially enough. If some one gives a back search on google mostly wont reach to original article without ref at hand. I suppose it will do for you as far as copyright thing is concerned.


Thanks for your great support.

Bookku (talk) 17:44, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Bookku, Sounds good. S Philbrick(Talk) 23:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

a thought about real world[edit]

For us this is just virtual world. What is just news to some, for some it is matter of life as this incoming sad news from pak. For Women who participated in Aurat March threats can turn out to be real. IMO Taking encyclopedic note of narratives does matter.


Bookku (talk) 06:01, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Please restore[edit]

Category:Russian emigrants to Argentina which you deleted a while back as empty. It is no longer so. TIA --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:36, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Piotrus,  Done S Philbrick(Talk) 11:29, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

About this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Modern_Monetary_Theory&diff=888515894&oldid=888508163[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Modern_Monetary_Theory&diff=888515894&oldid=888508163

Hi,

I wrote to the professor who held the course (Stefano Lucarelli) and this is his response (in Italian):

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Stefano Lucarelli <stefano.lucarelli@unibg.it> Date: mar 19 mar 2019 alle ore 18:37 Subject: Re: Stefano scusa una domanda: ma tu sai se questo paper qui è coperto da copyright? http://www00.unibg.it/dati/corsi/910003/64338-Warren%20Mosler%20Bergamo%20paper%20March%2010.pdf

Non è coperto da copyright, è materiale didattico preparato per il corso a Bergamo di cui ero coordinatore. Puoi farlo circolare.

TRANSLATION (of his answer): "It is not covered by copyright, it is teaching material prepared for the Bergamo course taught by me and of which I was the university coordinator. You can reproduce it."

--NUMB3RN7NE (talk) 17:51, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

NUMB3RN7NE, I appreciate that you took the time to look into the copyright status of the work.
Unfortunately, I believe the professor is mistaken. It is a common misunderstanding that documents without a copyright notice are free of copyright. However, almost all works (some exceptions such as works created by the US government) created in countries that are signatories to the Berne Convention (that includes Italy) are automatically subject to copyright, and can only be used if they are explicitly licensed or explicitly placed in the public domain. An email from the professor, which didn't even make the statement that the work has been released to the public domain, is not sufficient. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:13, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Ok I asked how to overcome this kind of "empasse"... basically it was told me that the professor should place a public declaration on the website of his university where he states that this document is free from copyright. I don't know if this is the right procedure or not, I asked because this is something I have never "experienced" before. --NUMB3RN7NE (talk) 18:33, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
NUMB3RN7NE, if the copyright holder is willing to provide a suitable license, there is a process by which they can file a permission statement. More information can be found at this page:
Wikipedia:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries S Philbrick(Talk) 13:15, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
NUMB3RN7NE, More information here:
Wikipedia:Donating_copyrighted_materials, including suggested wording the place on the website to indicate that the material is properly licensed. That approach is preferable to sending in the permission statement. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:18, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

ConnectNY revisions[edit]

The information I provided was from our website, but it is our professional history. If I cite the page, can it be included?

Another question I have is can I request to have the page deleted since it is incorrect? If so, how do I do that?

Prj.mls (talk) 12:48, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Prj.mls, No, simply adding a reference (which is always required anyway), is not a cure for a copyright violation. The material must be written in the editor's own words (which should not be you because of your conflict of interest).
It is extremely common that articles have errors in them but are preferred cure is correction rather than simple removal. There is a process for requesting deletion of an article but it's not trivial to carry out I can't recall a situation where an article was removed due to a correctable error. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:55, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
Prj.mls, I wish I could offer to help but I'm overcommitted at the moment. We do have a wiki project about libraries (a wiki project is roughly speaking a collection of editors with similar interests). An article related to libraries is very likely to attract the attention of some of those members. I hope someone there would be willing to help you:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Libraries S Philbrick(Talk) 12:59, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

April editathons at Women in Red[edit]

April 2019[edit]

Women in Red logo.svg
April 2019, Volume 5, Issue 4, Numbers 107, 108, 114, 115, 116, 117


Hello and welcome to the April events of Women in Red!

Please join us for these virtual events:


Other ways you can participate:


Subscription options: Opt-in (EN-WP) / Opt-in (international) / Unsubscribe

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

(Please excuse this post if it is a duplicate!)

Draft: Michael Takeo Magruder, Contest tag and immediate proposed amendment[edit]

Thanks for your message regarding Draft: Michael Takeo Magruder advising tag had been placed on Draft:Michael Takeo Magruder requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia.

I visited the draft this morning (UK time: 7:31am) to contest the tag and make the removal/amendment necessary to ensure the material did not infringe copyright. On visiting the location of the page I am informed "05:18, 27 March 2019 Athaenara (talk | contribs) deleted page Draft:Michael Takeo Magruder (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: tagged G12 as copyvio of www.robotsandavatars.net/documentation/writing/robots-and-avatars-fact-a-review-by-steve-boxer/ "CC licensed, but not an acceptable license due to NC"

I would be grateful if the draft material were re-instated so that I can immediately make the necessary changes to remove the material.Jeremydkp (talk) 07:43, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Jeremydkp, It's not gone, it's right here: Draft:Michael_Takeo_Magruder S Philbrick(Talk) 12:26, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your further message. I will revert to working on that page although it is an additional earlier draft. In future I will work offline only one drafts. As far as I am aware it does not infringe copyright. Jeremydkp (talk) 18:12, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

St Abb's Head Lighthouse[edit]

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because the wording that is being reported is simply that the I moved across from St Abb's Head, where it had been since 2011. The wording used at [2] is clearly itself taken from the existing wiki article on St Abb's Head as it was in 2011 (compare it with the version at 21:03, 27 March 2011).Grinner (talk) 12:48, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Grinner, I removed the CSD tag.
However, while copying within Wikipedia is permitted, it must be done in an acceptable way in order to preserve attribution. Please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia for best practices wording.
Not only will following this guideline ensure that our rules regarding attribution I met, attic such an edit notice will alert those who review the edits identified as potential copyright violations, and we can mark it as acceptable. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:53, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
I have added Template:Copied to the talk page. Grinner (talk) 13:03, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Grinner, That may be helpful but please note the guideline:
At minimum, this means providing an edit summary at the destination page – that is, the page into which the material is copied – stating that content was copied, together with a link to the source (copied-from) page, e.g., copied content from page name; see that page's history for attribution S Philbrick(Talk) 13:40, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
But I can't go back in and add an edit summary now, unless I made a dummy edit just so as to note the source in the edit history? Grinner (talk) 14:00, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Scrub that, I see the guidance states a dummy edit is fine. It shall be done.14:04, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Grinner, Thanks. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:35, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Titoism[edit]

Hi, can you please explain what was the issue and why were my edits reverted? You wrote britannica in explanation but didn't revert that?Sourcerery (talk) 12:50, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Sourcerery, One of your edits included material copied from:
this source. it is our policy, when detecting the possible copyright problem in an edit, to do rollback which undoes all edits by the same editor even if some of them may not be problematic. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:54, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Coleman lecture[edit]

Hello, you undid my addition of a new mission statement for the Office of Diversity, Literacy and Outreach of the American Library Association.. I cited the source and it is the mission statement so I can't reword it. I have the press release for the new lecturer. They did not give one in 2018. Let me know how I can provide the mission statement in a way that isn't copyright violation...I cited the website so I am not sure how to proceed. Thank you for your help.Kmccook (talk) 00:31, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

As long as you are looking at this article I tried to link to Brey-Casiano whose Wikipedia page uses her middle initial. I corrected her name and linked but the edit is gone. I also provided the name of the new sponsoring entity but this is gone, too. Any help appreciated. Thank you. Kmccook (talk) 00:45, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Kmccook, Please see Wikipedia:Avoid mission statements S Philbrick(Talk) 00:47, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Kmccook, As additional information, I do understand the challenge doing with mission statements. On the one hand, the exact wording is relevant so you don't want to paraphrase, on the other hand, if you use the exact wording, it's probably a copyright violation, other than the rare circumstance where an organization might provide a free license for their mission statement. Adding it in quotes will solve the copyright problem if it's not too long but, as the link suggests, Wikipedia takes of dim view on inclusion of mission statements. You mentioned some of the things that I didn't look closely at, saw simply mentioned that when we revert an edit that includes a copyright issue it is our policy to to rollback, which reverts all consecutive edits by the same editor. We can discuss if some of the other edits were otherwise appropriate. S Philbrick(Talk) 00:54, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

You are exactly right on the mission statement but I worked on this all day and the change of the organizational group is because of an expanded focus on equity, diversity and inclusion so could it be un reverted? Appreciate your consideration.Kmccook (talk) 01:00, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

I added back the new name of the sponsoring unit and an external link. It looks better now w/o the mission. Thank you.Kmccook (talk) 01:16, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Kmccook, Sounds good. S Philbrick(Talk) 20:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Rollback, please?[edit]

@Sphilbrick: On the page Fatal dog attacks in the United States, someone made 8 vandal-type edits which I explained on the Talk page, here: [3] I don't have rollback privs and am in the middle of a content dispute with another editor (not involved on that page and not with this vandal-editor) but I'm not going to step on a landmine and revert 8 straight edits. No siree, Billy Bob! I haven't found any noticeboard for mentioning rollbacks needed, so... I'm asking you if you can do it, or direct me to where it should be done. Thanks, Nomopbs (talk) 18:43, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Nomopbs, I took a look, but it was not clear-cut to me. You might try WP:AIV. Sorry. S Philbrick(Talk) 20:43, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
  • As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

List of Colors[edit]

I have just found your message to me about my entry of African Violet to the list. The section Color Issues is now missing from the Talk page, so I have no idea what I am supposed to read. The entry is now gone, so logically that would indicate it was contrary to the standards listed under Future initiatives. I have no idea now why I added the entry or why it was removed. However, I trust your judgment. Meanwhile, my own personal Color List project has been on hold for quite some time now due to other higher priority projects, and a mishap in 2017 that deleted many of my files leaving me only with year-old backups. I did check the old files and I have two lists from Wikipedia. The first is the only list showing African Violet. The second states that some colors were edited out. African Violet is not on that list. Even so, the RGB value (#B284BE; 178, 132, 190) assigned to African Violet was unique on all of my lists. It only appears on the Wikipedia list with no other source given. Since there is no entry for the color African Violet on Wikipedia, I suppose it must have been dropped on those grounds. Rod Lockwood (talk) 13:35, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Rod Lockwood, I see that you are relatively new. FYI, new comments go on the bottom of a talk page. If you go back to the list of colors talk page Talk:List of colors, you won't see my comment because it has been archived. You can either type "African" into the search box on the page, or go directly to archive 3. Caution. the specific discussion has been collapsed so open the section saying something about A-Al. The explanation is there. Feel free to discuss, as we ought to have an entry for African Violet if it can be supported. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:45, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Rod Lockwood, As an additional point, it sounds like you are knowledgeable about the subject, so I hope we can work together. I'm in an airport at the moment, so not in a position to track down additional info, but I put together a to-do list somewhere. Let's talk. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:48, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Unfortunately my project is stalled. Basically, I was trying to collect defined colors and organize them, remove the duplicates and give them consistent names (but citing popular alternatives) to use for whenever I needed to create images. My spreadsheets, have pages that include the range of skin and eye colors, coat coloring of horses and dogs, and the like. The project has been on the sidelines for several years now. The only changes made since 2016 has been formating the pages. If you like, I could send you a copy of the file, and the two old files, so you see what you could use from them. I generally write notes in my spreadsheets in order to pick up where I leave off. I do this just because I often hit a snag on a research project and not resume the project for quite some time. (There are places where it is noted that I did not document properly, started losing track of what I was doing, and had to start over.) I also try to make notations on the sources of information. I also have in the first page the rules that I use for color names and what colors I list. Also a full glossary of terms, or at least the ones I find useful. As for African Violet, according to my notes and new pages, I have dropped the color from my official list, but it is on a list of “personal colors” on the Notes pages of the two latest files.
Personally, I am backlogged. Aside from what I have on the computer system, I have forty years of paper that needs to be put into my computer system.
I apologize for the error of what order I commented in. I usually only make grammatical or spelling errors on Wikipedia. Sometimes I make requests for additional information, or clarification of a statement the article, but these are not frequent. Rod Lockwood (talk) 22:45, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Copyright violation[edit]

Dear sir, I have recently created the page of Malla Raji Reddy. The article should not be speedy deleted at this stage because this page is under construction. I have already deleted those statement and information which violates copyright policy of wikipedia. Malla Raji Reddy is a notable enough politician of India. This page should be there. There are number of reliable references. Those information violating copyright policy has wiped away totally. I am very much respectful to the copyright policy of Wikipedia. You are hereby requested to see and review the article again. If there is any other difficulties I will make it correct positively, thanking you. Pinakpani (talk) 18:15, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Pinakpani, As noted, the article you created seems to have substantial overlap with this site. Can you explain why you do not think this is a copyright issue? S Philbrick(Talk) 18:20, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Pinakpani, I do see that you didn't simply copy and paste the source, you have lightly paraphrased some sections but in my opinion it still qualifies as a close paraphrase which is still a copyright policy violation S Philbrick(Talk) 18:21, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
I have corrected those violative content very recent. Even added some reliable references like BBC news etc. I can seek help further from any sr. wikipedian like you. Thanks again. Pinakpani (talk) 18:28, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Pinakpani, For example, the source says:
"He carries a reward of Rs 15 lakh on his head"
and that exact phrase is still in the article. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:35, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

This has a different reliable source from https://www.rediff.com/news/2007/dec/18naxal.htm not https://naxalresistance.wordpress.com/category/malla-raji-reddy/ However, I have corrected it. Pinakpani (talk) 18:50, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Danny Dietz[edit]

Hi, I saw that you had removed a lot of the information I added in and stated it under good faith edits, is it ok if I put the information back in and paraphrase, so I don't have to start from scratch. Also, can you tell me what parts were under copyright? so I can further paraphrase thanks!. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delta fiver (talkcontribs) 13:36, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Delta fiver, Here is a linkto a report that identifies material that was copied.
It is not the best approach to copy the material and and then paraphrase. While many editors are aware of the current versions of articles should not contain violations of copyright policy, it appears that some editors are unaware that this prohibition applies to all past versions. A better approach is to write the material in your own words in an external editor and then make the edit.
Please take a look at Paraphrasing of copyrighted material. Many editors are surprised to learn that you can literally change every single word and still be in violation of copyright. Using a single source and simply modifying some (or even all!) Of the words is not a great practice. It is better to have multiple sources, read them, then rewrite in your own words and refer back to the original to make sure you haven't misstated facts. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the response, greatly appreciated. Im unable to access the report that displays the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delta fiver (talkcontribs) 14:24, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Delta fiver, Sorry, that report is delivered by a tool called copy patrol. Perhaps you need to be locked in to use it. Let me see if I can track down an alternative. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Delta fiver, Does this work? S Philbrick(Talk) 14:47, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Is there a possibility that you could E-mail it to me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delta fiver (talkcontribs) 14:45, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Delta fiver, See if the link I just proved works. If not, we'll look into other options, but I didn't immediately see how to email it. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
Delta fiver, There are times, and this may be an example, where paraphrasing is not the best approach and the exact text should be included. However it needs to be done properly, typically" for relatively short quotations, or in block quotes for longer quotations. And, of course properly cited.
Please read:
Wikipedia:Quotations
In particular note the section on overuse which talks about the problems of long quotations. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:58, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi the link works thank you, however, in this case, the citation of the medal and statue have been picked up as copyright, however, it was what was actually stated ,is there a way I can state it?. Thank you

Delta fiver has added back some sections. Can you help review to see if it is still copyvio paraphrasing? I still see some sentences copied from Travis Manion this time, but not whole paragraphs, but not sure about the other references. I also renamed to Draft:Danny P. Dietz as most articles are calling him Danny Dietz or Danny P. Dietz. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:40, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Sputnik Band[edit]

Dear Sphilbrick,

Could you please recheck my https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sputnik_(band) I've edited it nicely with all needed fields Please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Secretly canada (talkcontribs) 21:59, 13 April 2019 (UTC)


How to make my "Draft" not to be draft anymore? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Secretly canada (talkcontribs) 11:47, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Secretly canada, This is a great question to ask at the Teahouse. Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions S Philbrick(Talk) 11:50, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

My lengthening of the Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota history section[edit]

My lengthening of the Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota history section was removed because of a copyright violation, but what I added was from the Dakota County Historical Society, not what you sited as the source. The document you cited merely used the Dakota County Historical Society as a source as welI. I understand if you would like me to add the citation, but I would also like to know if there's maybe something else I may have violated on top of the perceived copyright violation? Thanks TaylorRiess (talk) 01:51, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

TaylorRiess, It is quite common that the exact same text appears in multiple places. When our copy patrol tool searches for matching text, it may not find the exact same source you used.
Can you provide a link to the Dakota County Historical Society source? I'll be very surprised if it has been freely licensed, but that would be required to use it as is (along with an appropriate citation, of course). S Philbrick(Talk) 12:20, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, here you are: http://www.dakotahistory.org/images/history/maps/Inver-Grove_History-Map.pdf and the actual website would be http://www.dakotahistory.org/images/history/maps TaylorRiess (talk) 18:18, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
TaylorRiess, Both of those links gave me 404 errors, but I was able to use the link to find this page on Inver Grove Heights: link. It is clearly marked as subject to full copyright. S Philbrick(Talk) 20:33, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't know why that didn't work. The PDF is independent of the website, merely compiled by it. https://www.dakotahistory.org/images/HistoryMaps/Inver-Grove-History-Map.pdf Also, sorry if I'm badgering, I'm just very new to this. TaylorRiess (talk) 23:45, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
TaylorRiess, Thanks for your concern, but you are not badgering. As you mentioned, you are new, attempting to make good faith contributions to Wikipedia but running into some roadblocks.
That link worked.
I note the absence of a specific copyright statement. Some people are under the impression that if a document does not have an explicit copyright statement, it is not subject to copyright. While that was true many years ago, it is not true in the US after the US signed the Berne Convention in 1989. Subsequent to that, copyright is automatic (with some rare exceptions such as works by certain federal government employees) and does not need to be specifically asserted. For material to be used, if it is not automatically public domain, or does not fall under some very narrow exceptions, it must be specifically licensed in a way that can be used in Wikipedia. The document you linked does not have such a license so it cannot be copied or even closely paraphrased. It can be used as a reference, but the material must be written in your own words, and not a close paraphrase of the source.
I'll be happy to go into more detail if any of this is not clear. S Philbrick(Talk) 01:36, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

You revert for copyright issues[edit]

Dear Sphilbrick, Hi, could you please explain why there is a copyright issue with http://ec.europa.eu/budget/library/biblio/publications/2018/financial-report_en.pdf on Budget of the European Union — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abelass (talkcontribs) 07:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Abelass, From the report:
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2018
© European Union, 2018
Does that answer your question? S Philbrick(Talk) 11:38, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Sure, I updated the text adding the needed copyrights. Hope this is fine.

No, you cannot simply add a copyright notice to a Wikipedia article. If the source material is copyrighted, you can use it as a source, but you must write the material in your own words.--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:35, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

RD1 unable to view URL[edit]

There's a copy on the Wayback Machine. Does that work for you? Otherwise it might be some script thing. It works for me on Firefox but I might try some other browser. Alpha3031 (tc) 15:31, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Alpha3031, I tried Chrome, IE and Firefox. None worked. However, the Wayback is sufficient. I completed it, thanks. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:36, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Your speedy deletion nomination of ASME B73 Pumps[edit]

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement.

The web page in question (https://www.techstreet.com/standards/asme-b73-1-2012?product_id=1863631) is NOT the owner of ASME B73 standards. The product description (in this case, B73.1) comes from the Standard itself, and can be found also on ASME's shop, a source that is cited multiple times in this article.

I am willing to provide you with approval from ASME on the use of this content. Papertd (talk) 17:42, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Papertd, If the text used in that article is available under one of the acceptable free licenses, I'll be happy to restore the article if you point out where it can be found and I can confirm that there is a free license identified on the source page.
Containing the text does not currently specify a free license but the copyright holder of the material would be willing to provide a free license, that would be the best and easiest next step. An alternative approach is to file a formal permission statement. You can read more about this at: Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials S Philbrick(Talk) 22:56, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Sphilbrick, while I wait on ASME's webmaster to get back to me, what if I rephrased the article and cited the same sources? Would you be willing to restore the article on the contingency that I do that? I initially did not stray from ASME's wording out of caution as to not misrepresent the scope of the standards. Papertd (talk) 17:42, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
Papertd, I'm leaving for a press conference in a few minutes so I will not be able to do much until I return a few hours from now. I understand your goal not to misrepresent a standard. The standard itself could be placed within quotation marks or in a block quote and cited. I don't recall how much of the article text was the standard itself; we may have an issue if there is not much to the article outside of the standard, but we can address that. I'm not comfortable restoring the article because that would mean restoring what I believe is a copyright violation. However, I have emailed you a copy of the contents. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:15, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Stile Liberty[edit]

Can you revert not copyrighted material? Entire Galileo Chini section, part of graphics etc. Or if you can just revert your edit I will remove copyright material. Thank you.Sourcerery (talk) 13:24, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Sourcerery, I temporarily undid my revision deletion so that you can recover the material not subject to copyright. Please let me know when you are done so I can restore the revision deletion. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:29, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, done.Sourcerery (talk) 13:33, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Sourcerery, Thanks for handling it so promptly. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:13, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

WDSO Chesterton[edit]

I just noticed you took down my edits on the WDSO Chesterton Wikipedia for "Copy Right Reasons". As the public relations officer for WDSO FM, I have permission to post the content. Why did you find it necessary to remove the information added? I spent nearly 2 hours typing half of the stuff up per the General Manager's Instructions... At the very least please undo you revisions and ill take the content from our website off until I can get the form for copyrighted material or whatever is needed. Other stuff included in that edit was not copyrighted whatsoever — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakeweitzel (talkcontribs) 14:32, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Jakeweitzel, if you can place a note on the website noting the release of the text under the a compatible licence, that'll be the quickest way, and once the note is seen it'll be restored, but our policy does not allow use to have text that isn't officially released under a compatible licence or public domain. It needs to be correctly licensed because we don't want to be sued for copyright and we don't want the people who reuse text from Wikipedia to be sued either. Alpha3031 (tc) 17:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Jakeweitzel, Thanks to Alpha3031 for stepping up when I was away. in addition to the useful advice from that editor, I'll also add that you have a conflict of interest due to your position. Please see WP:COI, especially the mandatory disclosure requirements. I cannot restore your edit, but if you want me to email you any content, I can do so, although you will have to enable email as it appears not to be currently available. Check the lower section of the first page on preferences in order to enable your email. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:38, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

What is your view about the current Archbishop of Onitsha,Most Rev.Valerian Okeke?[edit]

I have read so much about his influence on the education system in his State Anambra Nigeria. Kevinchuks (talk) 22:23, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

He was born in umudioka of Anambra state Nigeria inBorn: Tuesday, 20 October 1953. Kevinchuks (talk) 22:30, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Kevinchuks, No opinion. S Philbrick(Talk) 23:33, 18 April 2019 (UTC)