| Revision as of 01:29, 7 January 2015 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,291,255 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Mdann52/Archive 20) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:39, 8 January 2015 edit undoTechnical 13 (talk | contribs)37,142 edits →Your closure of Misplaced Pages:Bot owners noticeboard#Possible Bot Issue: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 79: | Line 79: | ||
| ] (]) 01:37, 3 January 2015 (UTC) | ] (]) 01:37, 3 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
| :{{ping|Beecee14}} Apologies, I was unclear originally. I meant my comments were the same as the previous reviews; His notability independent from the band is simply not present. Additionally, any creation of the article seperately needs to be discussed at ], as it was previously decided there to merge them together. --]]<small>]</small> 20:33, 3 January 2015 (UTC) | :{{ping|Beecee14}} Apologies, I was unclear originally. I meant my comments were the same as the previous reviews; His notability independent from the band is simply not present. Additionally, any creation of the article seperately needs to be discussed at ], as it was previously decided there to merge them together. --]]<small>]</small> 20:33, 3 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
| == Your closure of ] == | |||
| I entirely disagree that there is nothing to be done there. An unapproved bot task was reported, admitted to by the accused, and as a result, I think the misused bot flag should be removed from the bot until BAG can decide what to do about it. Please revert your closure so that this can be discussed appropriately. Thanks. — <span class="nowrap">{{U|]}} <sup>(] • ] • ])</sup></span> 14:39, 8 January 2015 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 14:39, 8 January 2015
| This is Mdann52's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Mdann52 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
| to-do | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Ongoing jobs:
If you would like a regularly-updated copy of this status box on your user page or talk page, put {{DRN case status}} on your page. Click on that link for more options. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Template:Archive box collapsible
| This is Mdann52's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34Auto-archiving period: 7 days  |
 |
|---|
| 12 December 2024 |
|
Request on 19:00:30, 28 December 2014 for assistance on AfC submission by Meridianus
- Meridianus (talk · contribs)
Regarding -- 15:36, 28 December 2014 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page Draft:Draft article on John E. Arnold (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://historicalsociety.stanford.edu/pdfmem/ArnoldJ.pdf)
Hi, the first article I've written for Misplaced Pages was rejected for copyright violation. I have 40 years experience as a researcher with seven books, so I thought I was following established rules for quotation and citation. But perhaps something slipped through or there are special guidelines I need to learn here.
Could you please help me correct the error? Do I need to use separate or more complete quotations and use less paraphrasing? Did I not associate citations with text sufficiently? I'm really keen to see Dr. Arnold's work properly promoted so will work with you make this right. Thank you.
Also, if there's a better way to refer to the now deleted page & review, please let me know. — Meridianus (talk) 19:00, 28 December 2014 (UTC) Meridianus (talk) 19:00, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Meridianus: The issue is that, while Misplaced Pages allows a limited number of quotes, this used far too many. I would advise rewriting it, but with less paraphrasing. Misplaced Pages uses the CC-BY-SA 3.0 licence, so any copyrighted work presents issues, so we get round this by forbidding it completely. --Mdann52talk to me! 19:07, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, to be clear do you mean to say I should use fewer quotes and *more* paraphrasing? Also, would it help if I receive copyright permission from one of the professors who wrote the Memorial Resolution in 1963? I've learned one is still alive on Stanford campus. — Meridianus (talk) 19:14, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
@User:Mdann52: A few more questions -- 1) How do I recover the deleted article for revision? (I have only an older copy offline) 2) Should I have kept the article in my user space to avoid losing the text (rather than moving it to Draft as prompted)? 3) My article has 30 references and 49 citations; is the copyright problem only with the one reference that has eight citations? 4) Would it be better to attribute quotes to the speakers, e.g., "John Smith, Chairman, said on Mary's passing, 'She was a warm person.'"? 5) How would I convey to Misplaced Pages that I have permission from the surviving co-authors of the 1963 Memorial Resolution to use the text freely? Thank you for your help. -- Meridianus (talk) 22:49, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Meridianus: you should not use any close pharaphrasing or copying on Misplaced Pages. If you want a copy, please talk to User talk:RHaworth; While he may not be able to restore it, he should be able to email it to you for further work. Moving to draft is fine; Articles with copyright issues are deleted wherever they are. I don't think there was a referencing issue, however I didn't get onto evaluating it. If you need to use quotes, you need to attribute them to the speaker, however it's generally better to try and summarise what they say instead. Finally, WP:CONSENT describes the process to show you have permission; If you send that in, the page can probably be restored. --Mdann52talk to me! 07:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
@User:Mdann52: I significantly revised the article last week. I'm unclear on how the re-reviewing process typically proceeds. Should I have let you know or are you informed automatically? Or will another reviewer take it up when he/she has time? I received such quick feedback on my first submission, I haven't wanted to seem too eager on expecting a re-review given the backlog. —Meridianus (talk) 18:22, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Meridianus: It deffinately looks better now. My one comment it is goes into a bit tpoo much detail; WP:UNDUE states that we should give an overview, not cover in excessive detail. If you wish, I can have a go at cutting it down a bit? --Mdann52talk to me! 09:25, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
@User:Mdann52: Yes, please go ahead and reduce as you believe appropriate —seeing your revisions will be a good learning experience for me. Probably I'll grasp the pattern from your edits, and I'll ask if I believe anything important was omitted. Then I can move on to writing an interpretive Stanford Magazine article. Thank you. – Meridianus (talk) 17:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Wong Sing-chi
Why is there no consensus to move to either "Nelson Wong" or "Nelson Wong Sing-chi"? --George Ho (talk) 03:57, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- There are 2 supports and 4 opposes. Even with the comments taken into account, I think the consensus not to move is clear. I was going to close as "no consensus", then reread it and concluded the oppose arguments were the strongest. --Mdann52talk to me! 12:03, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- Why counting the sockpuppet's? --George Ho (talk) 19:16, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- As and when they are confirmed sockpuppets, then I'll feel free to discount them. However, until confirmed at an SPI, I can see no reason to discount them. --Mdann52talk to me! 09:25, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
- Why counting the sockpuppet's? --George Ho (talk) 19:16, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Draft:Erno Polgar
Dear Mdann52! Many thanks for the (m) minor edit on my draft: Erno Polgar. Can You clean this draft and to publish it? Many thanks! Eitan ben Avrohom — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.132.184.37 (talk) 09:18, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
- I'll take another look when I get the time to do so. --Mdann52talk to me! 12:03, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Mr. Mdann52! I did a little new article. I would like to wish You Happy New Year" Yours sincerely, Shalom: Eitan ben Avrohom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eitan ben Avrohom (talk • contribs) 15:52, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Mdann52! Please to see - if You have time - the "new" article, after a lot of work. Yours sincerely: Eitan ben Avrohom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eitan ben Avrohom (talk • contribs) 13:50, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Dear Mdann52! Editor NOYSTER got permit for me for moving draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Erno_Polgar
What do You think about is? Your sincerely: Eitan ben Avrohom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eitan ben Avrohom (talk • contribs) 09:49, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Dear Mdann52! Thanks for all of helps! Now I have some photo too on my page. Yours truly: Eitan ben Avrohom
Dear Mdann52! I edited Tom Barat´s (New York) words about question of notability and I published some more links for this article - which is no orphan and real fact- Erno Polgar is a notability man. I hope your kind help. Yours truly, Eitan ben Avrohom=Erno Polgar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eitan ben Avrohom (talk • contribs) 14:31, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Dear Mdann52! Thanks for fixing image on my page, but unfortunately - please to see it - some editors have problems. Can you help me? Yours sincerely: Eitan ben Avrohom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eitan ben Avrohom (talk • contribs) 13:02, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Dear Mdann52! I did some corrections ib ny article, which is no orphan, it is neutral, Erno Polgar is a notability person - now it there are some words about it from Tom Barat from New York. I hope You have time for a moment to see the article and the new links. Please to help You! Thanks for adcance! Yours truly Eitan ben Avrohom=Erno Polgar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eitan ben Avrohom (talk • contribs) 14:39, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
01:37:54, 3 January 2015 review of submission by Beecee14
The message said no changes have been made, however, I had made several extensive edits to the previously reviewed article. In fact I created an entirely new section focusing on Payne's independent work, that is not a part of his work with One Direction, and have corrected sources to newspaper articles and other valid sources. How can you decline the article on the basis that it has not been edited in any way then?
Beecee14 (talk) 01:37, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
- @Beecee14: Apologies, I was unclear originally. I meant my comments were the same as the previous reviews; His notability independent from the band is simply not present. Additionally, any creation of the article seperately needs to be discussed at Talk:List of One Direction members, as it was previously decided there to merge them together. --Mdann52talk to me! 20:33, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Your closure of Misplaced Pages:Bot owners noticeboard#Possible Bot Issue
I entirely disagree that there is nothing to be done there. An unapproved bot task was reported, admitted to by the accused, and as a result, I think the misused bot flag should be removed from the bot until BAG can decide what to do about it. Please revert your closure so that this can be discussed appropriately. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} 14:39, 8 January 2015 (UTC)