Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:51, 29 September 2009

I remain active to answers queries related to CSBot, which I intent to keep operational as long as it is still useful and welcome.

Shalom from Hakham Hayim Malkhasy

Shalom, I read your notice that you found the similar info that I put into "Abraham Kefeli" in an other site. Thus, I am the member of the International Institute of the Crimean Karaites, and I have all Copy Rights given me by the director of the Institute Prof. Dr. Valentin Kefeli. Moreover, Abraham Kefeli is my friend.

Kol tuv Hayim— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hayim Malkhasy (talk • contribs)

Dahl's Foods

The article has been extensively rewritten. _{—Mattofwashington (talk) 05:05 13 August 2009 (UTC)}

Camilo Polavieja

I didn't copy it in a internal website, i copy it on a external website in http://en.wikipilipinas.org/index.php?title=Camilo_Polavieja but I only edit the Marques de Polavieja and (1837-1914)

Mexican Naval Aviation

Is it possible if i can paraphrase the article?Homan05

Anthrax War

I wrote an entry using the filmmakers' website -- with their permission since they are attending a film festival next month and showing this film -- info from their website was used on infowars.com -- the bot discovered the infowars website -- I've written a temporary article which is much shorter.Tjmayerinsf (talk)

Re: Roger Pederson

In regards to the copyright issue, it seems it was because of the official citation, which I've found in this context usually falls under the category of public domain. Packerfansam (talk) 18 August 2009

The New American Century

Same problem as happened with Anthrax Wars -- I am creating this for an upcoming screening in California, and am using *only* material from the filmmaker's official website at BuenaOndaFilms(dot)com -- the info has been copied on informationwars and other websites.Tjmayerinsf (talk)

correct names

I didn duplicate the name of "Tabriz municipality" and "Saat tower" also "Ark of Tabriz" and "Arg of Tabriz" "Saat tower" is just a part of the building of "Tabriz municipality" so "saat tower" is incorrect name also "Arg" is incorrect and the word "Ark" is correct, pls delet or redirect this two incorrect pages:"Saat tower" to "Tabriz municipality" and "Arg of Tabriz" to "Ark of Tabriz". I am an Tabrizian editor of wikipedia and I know the correct names, pls have a look to my userpage and my works about this page and my pix.

Regards,

Warning on "James Marion West"

Hi, I turned the James Marion West article into a disambig since the father and son are both famous (the original article was about the son. In the middle of my edits your bot complained that there were two articles that were the same and your message said I should offer an explanation here.

FYI: An overzealous editor whom I presumed received notification through the bot created a circular redirect and destroyed some of my changes while I was doing this. I undid his/her change and hopefully there won't be any more to that.

-- mcorazao

Proposed principles

Thank you for the guiding principles, they are certainly thought-provoking. Can you add one on the Committee attitude towards privacy of correspondence (reading private emails) and such? This is not fully addressed by 10) "Exclusion of evidence". Thanks, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:13, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not convinced it's relevant at all in the first place; my understanding of that legal principle (even if it applied to ArbCom) make it relevant strictly to mail that is in transit. (In other words, it would apply to interception of the mail, not of seizing it before it was sent or after it was received.) — Coren  20:18, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I think Radek covered this in his evidence here. Whether this does or doesn't apply to Misplaced Pages is an interesting precedent to make. I may not like it, but if it doesn't apply, saying so clearly will help the project (by giving you something you can point to in the future rulings). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

On a more pleasant subject, I'd appreciate Committee's (or yours) advice how to balance one's desire to chat about Misplaced Pages with friends and colleagues in private with not violating site's policies. PS. I am quite fond of transparency, but you must admit there are things that one may want to say in private and at the same time not violate any wiki policy. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:31, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I hope you'll forgive me for not going into that topic with you at this time. Under different circumstances, this might have been a productive discussion but given that I'm sitting on the committee that is to rule on that topic (and, indeed, that I will be the one writing most of the decision) I need to keep an arm's length from the subject.

I very much want to make sure, at least, that the decision itself will give you (and everyone) as good guidance on the subject as possible, though — that's my primary objective and part of the reason why I posted the first proposed principles early. — Coren  20:44, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate your sentiments here. I've already proposed in the workshop one way to salvage something out of this mess. Are such initiatives welcomed by the Committee? We are currently discussing how to reform our group to make it more transparent in the future and your principles will help - but I am sure there are blind spots we have that we cannot see without outside help. If the community thinks we have veered of course, we are willing to steer back towards it. In the end, we want to help the project. I hope my wiki record proves that I mean what I say here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:52, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Of course; contrary to what some may believe, the members of the committee actually actively dislike the fact that disputes end up in front of us. :-) Attempts to solve problems are always welcome. — Coren  20:57, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Inspired by our conversation, here's my idea: Misplaced Pages:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern_European_mailing_list/Workshop#Proposal_by_Piotrus_-_public_discussion_forum_for_EE_topics. If we can get this to work, this should vastly contribute to easing the problem we are facing (I'd hope). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:29, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I am wondering if you think the above proposal is a good idea? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Navy Born

Re this bot edit. Data itself is not copyrighted. I removed the template. --Bensin (talk) 20:54, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppet

Is someone going to address this issue anytime soon? Offliner (talk) 04:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I expect so, one way or the other, though that is part of a long list of data points to examine during the case. Do you see current disruption that needs to be addressed urgently? — Coren  04:54, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

No, not really. It can wait. But if it really is a sockpuppet, then it's actions need to be looked at during the case as well. Offliner (talk) 05:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: CorenSearchBot for D. Daniel Vujic

The information as provided on the D. Daniel Vujic article is accurate and furthermore no copyright infringements have accrued, in particular the text excerpts borrowed from Plaxo as the information was provided by me. As for professional credits and additional biography confirmation there are dozens of reliable sources on the Internet to confirm the article, one such source is http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1729423/

D. Daniel Vujic

Your bot is biting me

Hi, could you tell your bot to stop giving me warning messages for the fungal taxon stubs I'm making? I think we went through this once before... thanks. Sasata (talk) 04:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Rebecca Adamson

Hi Coren. I got a CorenSearchBot notice and tag on Rebecca Adamson. The primary source is Dartmouth News, not the wiki mentioned in your tag. Whew are you fast. Hope that helps. -SusanLesch (talk) 04:49, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Your bot

I just created Soap and Detergent Association. Your bot did identify the page I used as my source, but I didn't copy any copyrighted material. Adam_sk (talk) 04:50, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Maria L. de Hernández

Hi again. This time you located the correct source but I am quite sure that I have rewritten it enough that it isn't a copyright violation. The article tag's been removed. -SusanLesch (talk) 07:13, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Diablo II Soundtrack

Your bot tagged Diablo II Soundtrack as a possible copyvio, which makes sense statistically, as there's really not enough content in the article yet for a significant divergence (most of the article is a track listing, guaranteed to be the same). So just letting you know that your bot found a source I hadn't used, but I added to the article anyway. —Disavian (/_contribs) 07:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

LCH.Clearnet

Your bot tagged LCH.Clearnet. This is in the making of a new article about a company in London, seperate from Clearing house (finance). I have used some of the contents to get the article started. Darkieboy236 (talk) 12:31, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Responding in Coren's absence: Note that you still have to attribute content which you borrowed from contributors to a different article. This is best done by placing the {{Copied}} template on both source and target articles' talk pages and noting where it came from in an edit summary on the target article - that way, the attribution history will be preserved.

I took the liberty to complete all these steps on your behalf.

Happy editing, MLauba (talk) 13:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)