Jump to content

User talk:Sphilbrick/Archive 118

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 115Archive 116Archive 117Archive 118Archive 119Archive 120→Archive 125

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).

Guideline and policy news

  • Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection any article on a beauty pageant, or biography of a person known as a beauty pageant contestant, which has been edited by a sockpuppet account or logged-out sockpuppet, to be logged at WP:GS/PAGEANT.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:53, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

85.31.141.214

Can user:85.31.141.214, user:72.255.75.130 and useR:85.31.138.204 please be blocked ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 14:45, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

CLCStudent,  Done S Philbrick(Talk) 14:49, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Archibald Cull Birtwistle

i see no button Shipsview (talk) 20:09, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Shipsview, Someone else worked on clearing the problem. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:14, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Chang Moo Kwan "good faith edit"

Violated copyright how and where? "I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary" - which I utter fail to grasp.

Good faith? Have I done something unfair? What?

Im not certain even where the http://kmamhof.com/GM%20lee%20nam%20suk%202015%20legend-c.htm comes from, if that really is what triggered this. I may have gotten this info from the original Lee Nam Suk wiki entry.

I seriously hope you didn't flush my work down the toilet over this. Hope you can undo this mistake and *maybe* just remove the problematic link (or text) yourself. And I'm sure I can as long as ya remove the lock. --TrickShotFinn (talk) 17:10, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

OK, now looking at the link and the Lee Nam Suk entry, I see the resemblence of text. I didn't know of this beforehand. Jeez, the weblink even has wikipedia citation numbers? But please restore my edits and/or let me remove the the text that the wiki entry and the weblink share. --TrickShotFinn (talk) 17:25, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
TrickShotFinn, I trust you are aware that many Wikipedia articles are copied to other locations. In some cases they comply with our requirements to provide attribution in some cases they do not. When someone copies material from one Wikipedia article to another Wikipedia article, this is often flagged by our Copy Patrol tool. However, that tool doesn't identify that text in Wikipedia article A came from Wikipedia article B, it often identifies the source of the material as Internet article C, which happens to be completely or mostly a copy of Wikipedia article B. this is frustrating to me; I've asked that the tool check for copies coming from within Wikipedia but my request have not been enacted. Thus, it is often puzzling when an edit is reverted as the purported source of the material is a place that the editor knows nothing about (as in this case).
Copying within Wikipedia is permitted if done properly.
The relevant guideline is here: Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia
Complying with that guideline will not prevent the Copy Patrol tool from identifying the edit as a potential problem, but I assume others follow the same practice I follow which is to inspect the edit summary before taking any action. If the edit summary complies with the required guideline, then the item will be flagged as a false positive, and you will never even know it. However, if you copy within Wikipedia and do not follow the required guideline, it will look like a copyright violation and be reverted.
Can you clarify what you did? I can, of course, recover the edit if in fact it was a copy within Wikipedia and simply not properly attributed which can be fixed after recovering the edit. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:44, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Ok, nevermind. I restored an older state and this time; I'll try to write without running afoul with the Copy Patrol. Sorry if I sounded unpleasant back there.--TrickShotFinn (talk) 17:54, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
TrickShotFinn, Quite understandable — I'd be in a foul mood if I made a sequence of edits and someone undid them on me. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:12, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

editing

Hi why did you delete the editing I have done on the Gentle Fire page? Shozyger (talk) 15:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Shozyger, As explained in the edit summary the material appears to be copied from this source. I didn't find evidence that the source was properly licensed. Let me know if I missed it. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:10, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks I am the author of that source! I had not finished the work yet, that's why I did not submit the article yet — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.67.96 (talk) 15:11, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

I wondered if that was the case. On the one hand, congratulations for a lot of hard work. I didn't read it in full but I did scan it a bit. Unfortunately, I have to point you to {{wp:coi]]. is highly discouraged to include your own comments, published elsewhere, into an article. If an article exists, you are encouraged to propose edits on the article talk page and let an independent editor make the call.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:14, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes of course, however, I did not feel that those were "my" comments as I was mainly quoting what others said on broadcast recordings to which I have offered references. Are you saying that because I am an expert in the subject I am not allowed to contribute my knowledge and should wait for someone else to take that knowledge and rehash it? That sounds a bit strange to me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shozyger (talk • contribs) 15:40, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Shozyger, The Wikipedia community relationship with experts is mixed. I am very supportive of experts being involved — I don't think any rationale is necessary as it's obvious. However, experts are often used to Writing based upon their extensive knowledge, and do not always cite their edits to published reliable sources. This sometimes creates a tension. Anything you add needs to be backed up by a published reliable source. That wasn't the case in your edits unless I missed something. Does this make sense? S Philbrick(Talk) 17:05, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Could you please restore my changes so that I can add the published resource (approved PhD) as reference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.67.96 (talk) 20:01, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done (Please sign your edits)--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:13, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Deletion review for Craig Foster (filmmaker)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Craig Foster (filmmaker). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 00:27, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Black Myth: Wukong

Hello. The article Black Myth: Wukong was deleted erroneously by you. The cited website (https://www.gearosplay.in/2020/09/top-6-samurai-martial-arts-games-of.html) is actually a copy of the Wikipedia article, as the creation date was November 2020, months after the supposed offending Wikipedia article was created. You can see this from the history of the article. The copyright violation was committed on Wikipedia, not the other way around. Please undo the deletion when you can. Thank you. -- Big Wang (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Big Wang,  Done S Philbrick(Talk) 23:44, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. Could you also undelete Talk:Black Myth: Wukong also? Thank you. ––Big Wang (talk) 04:08, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Deletion review for Northern Arizona Wranglers

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Northern Arizona Wranglers. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tom Danson (talk) 04:22, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Douglas Breeden

Hi Sphilbrick. Yesterday I created this article in good faith (I really thought that I had changed the text; certainly, I included only a percentage of what was a very long university staff-page). But if it was indeed a blatant violation, then I don't object to you deleting it. However, I'm wondering whether there is any way of asking for a "copyright-preview" before publishing, so as to avoid this in the future? Thanks. Fintor (talk) 07:51, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

(PS: please may I ask to see the text, so that I can fix it without starting from scratch?)

Fintor, The copy patrol tool identified it as 84% overlap. I emailed you the original text. we actually do have a process for reporting things that might be a close call. Those are reported to Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Editors can weigh-in and help rescue the article if it's salvageable. However, in my opinion 84% overlap was way too much, so I used the speedy deletion option.
It's not really a big deal. You now have the original text, and you can look at the source and try again. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:15, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Sphilbrick. Thanks for this. For my education, may I ask two general questions: (1) Is it possible to run edits through the "copy patrol tool" before posting? (2) Biographical articles of this sort are more like a "cv" than anything - i.e. a list of achievements / reasons for "fame", positions, awards, and education - and so there's limited scope for "rewording" the source text... how then does one approach this? Thanks again. Fintor (talk) 07:35, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Fintor, While it is not possible to run it through Copy Patrol in advance, there are two other tools which can help assess copyright issues. check out duplication detector and Earwig at Wikipedia:Copyright_violations#Other_resources. My preference is Earwig, but you can check out to see which one you find easier to use. People who assess copyright issues are understanding of the copyright exceptions for pure lists, so while those might trigger a report, it is unlikely that an edit will be reverted if it is truly a pure list. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:52, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Sphilbrick. Thanks again. Just for interest I ran Financial economics (my "pet article") through earwig. It returned a 90% re: https://www.unzmarkt-frauenburg.at/blog/economic-system-the-four-types-of-pj6.php - But this is in fact a copy of the wiki article, i.e. and not the other way round. Presumably a human copy-patroller would know the difference... Fintor (talk) 08:31, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Draft:142nd Support Battalion

Hello Sphilbrick. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Draft:142nd Support Battalion, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: In my experience, GlobalSecurity.org website continues to pass off content copied from US Military websites as its own work. this may be in public domain texr. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 11:04, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Shirt58, That makes sense, thanks. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:00, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Boundary commissions (United Kingdom)

Hi Sphilbrick - ref your recent revert & revdelete on Boundary commissions (United Kingdom). I've explained to the user at Talk:Boundary commissions (United Kingdom)#Parliamentary Constituencies Bill 2019-21 briefing - the text they presumably copied from should be able to be re-used under the Open Parliament Licence. I don't know what state it was copied in but if it's a question of slapping an attribution on then I'd be happy to do that. ninety:one (reply on my talk) 18:36, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Ninetyone, I responded there. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:47, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Hey Sphilbrick, you deleted my article

I’m trying to give my band teacher a Wikipedia page. I’m not sure how to link a deleted article, but it was titled Draft:John Power (Enfield, CT). He teaches at JFK middle school, and I’d like to make him a page. Thanks

I'm stunned that you are reaching out to me. The draft article you created was deleted because it look like vandalism. If it wasn't intended as a joke, it wasn't remotely ready. See WP:YFA. However, it is highly unlikely that your band teacher qualifies for inclusion.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:25, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Park View Medical College

I don't want to just revert you, but I do not see that the material in this page which you marked as copyvio is present in the source cited. DGG ( talk ) 01:25, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

DGG, Article text: Park View Medical College and Hospital is a state of the art teaching and medical facility with a unique architectural design throughout its 1 high-rise buildings built on 130,000 square feet of land in the heart of Sylhet
Source text: Sylhet Women's Medical College and Hospital is a state of the art teaching and medical facility with a unique architectural design throughout its 3 high-rise buildings built on 130,000 square feet of land in the heart of Sylhet S Philbrick(Talk) 01:51, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
I se Primefac found morethan this to be copied--see his talk p. That's why I (sometimes) ask first. DGG ( talk ) 02:02, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 41

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020

  • New partnership: Taxmann
  • WikiCite
  • 1Lib1Ref 2021

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Kaikeyi article

Hello, recently you removed the content of Kaikeyi article. I did not copy the content from any other website, but from the history of the article itself. It was wrote on Wikipedia in 2008, but in last 3 years, it was removed by a user. The blog site that you are talking about was published in 2011, so the content is original to Wikipedia and should not be removed. This old revision [1] is of the article in 2008. Here you can find the info which was removed just now.

Similar situation has occurred with me. A website copied content from the Jambavan article. Later, the content was removed from Wiki page, as it was unsourced. When I re wrote the information, it was removed again and I got a notice regarding copyright violation. But later it was resolved and the content was restored. I think there are hundred of articles with the similar situation.

Regards,.💠245CMR💠.•👥📜 14:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

245CMR,  Done S Philbrick(Talk) 16:37, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much, it is possible that I may restore many other articles related to Ramayana, as they are in very poor condition right now. .💠245CMR💠.•👥📜 16:50, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

245CMR, If you do, and edit summary explaining that you are restoring an earlier version will signify to those of us who watch for copyright violations that it should not be reverted. S Philbrick(Talk) 16:52, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

I gave an note in the edit description box [2]. May be I should leave an invisible note in the article. .💠245CMR💠.•👥📜 16:56, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

When you are tired urhobo

Stop changing our history write up you fool Kwa265 (talk) 14:35, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Kwa265, ?? S Philbrick(Talk) 14:37, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Mountaineering boot

Hi Sphilbrick , I added the section about the mountaineering boots, and I consulted it with an IFMGA mountain guide, and there is alot to find about the subject in books and on various sites, that it can happen that it looks like a violation of a site or book, hich makes it than difficult to refrase it, with out looking like a violation of it. And getting the information from a tour guide site, would be quite strange, than I would rather go to a more informative site like from the BMC or in my own country, the NKBV.

Regards, Travellin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Travellin (talk • contribs) 10:34, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Travellin, I was actually hoping that you might respond, if only so that I could ask you whether your interest in editing this article is just a casual interest or whether you have mountaineering experience.
Regarding the content, I don't disagree with your desire to choose a source that's informative, but the text must be written in general, in your own words. We do permit exceptions such as exact quotations although these are to be generally as short as possible, and must be clearly indicated as quotes either with quote marks or with block quotes. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:19, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

The reason why I added it, was also because of my background as a mountaineer, and having worked as a flight/ ER nurse for a mountain rescue organisation, based in Chamonix, France, the mountain guide, I asked for information, is my brother, and he delivered also the picture on the page of the mountain boots under the name Zikking. Travellin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Travellin (talk • contribs) 17:02, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Travellin, Thanks for that info. I've never climbed in France, in fact, I've only spent 15 minutes in France, so not enough time to climb :) The closest is Switzerland. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:12, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

December with Women in Red

Women in Red | December 2020, Volume 6, Issue 12, Numbers 150, 173, 178, 182, 183


Online events:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:41, 26 November 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

Administrator changes

removed Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

added Izno

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Brent International School Manila

Thanks for taking a look at the copyright problems on this draft. Unfortunately, there's still outstanding copyright violations. Here's the ones I've been able to track down:

  • The first paragraph is an almost word for word copy of the first paragraph here. There are some changes; the copy here includes "...and international perspective" and the "...and equipped for entry to colleges and universities throughout the world" is modified from "...and equipped not just for entry to universities throughout the world..." at that source.
  • The first two sentences of the history section are a word for word copy from the third paragraph here, with the exception of the addition of the parenthetical "(that location has since closed)".
  • The entire Philosophy and Goals section is lifted word for word from this pdf, starting with labeled page 2 (actual page 8 in the PDF).

Some of these copyright violations were extant in the very first version of this edition of the draft. Thanks for your attention, --Hammersoft (talk) 04:25, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Hammersoft, I see that this was reported here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Edwinacuna_/_Edwinacuna69 and has been deleted. S Philbrick(Talk) 20:28, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

I appreciate the look into the Julius Debrah article, Unfortunately the reversal of the entire page as a copyright violations seems a little harsh. I have reworked the article and I plead you look back into that. The initial article had tags with the need for more citations and references to the article since it had less sourced information. With that in mind a conscious approach was taken to get more information about the subject in question and to get more data and sourced information. Look back into the re edits and leave a message. Thanks. Ampimd (talk)13:44, 4 December 2020

I appreciate that you are relatively new in terms of edits, but you've been here for five years. Are you not yet aware that providing a link to the article in question and signing your post would help? Yes, I can manage to track down the article you are talking about, and I can figure out how to find your user page, but when you are asking for help, it helps to provide basic information.
I anticipated that you might be unhappy with the decision. I haven't looked at all of what you did but I do see quite a number of consecutive edits so you apparently spent some time working on this article.
However, one of your larger edits was a substantial violation of copyright, assuming that the notice at the bottom of this page:
Copyright 2019 CENTRE FOR DEMOCRATIC TRANSITIONS-GHANA, All Right Reserved
is accurate.
It is standard practice when encountering a copyright violation to do a rollback which undoes all consecutive edits by the same editor. if you think the edit involving the material at that link is actually not a copyright violation, explain why and if you are correct I will restore everything. If you accept that the particular edit is problematic, I did a revision deletion to the particular edit in question but did not touch the others, so you could restore those edits yourself. It is our experience that when an editor makes an edit in violation of copyright policy, it is very often the case that contiguous edits are problematic and should be reverted until such time as it can be shown that they are fine. Feel free to redo any of the edits that you think are acceptable.S Philbrick(Talk) 13:52, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Very sorry for the issues raised. I have been here for 5 years but I am still new to edits as you said. Still learning and working on improving. Thanks for checking it out and giving me some feedback. That information has been withdrawn and its been edited to suit the purposes of wikipedia. Thanks for the feedback. Hope to come back from extra help when needed, Thank you.-----------------------------------Ampimd (talk)17:08, 4 December 2020

McDowell Mountain Preserve - copyright material

Thank you, Sphilbrick

I understand what I did. I would like to be able to get in and change the content so it is not a direct copy from the website. How can I get back in to rewrite this section?

My copy to add is: After years of land acquisition through purchase, exchange with developers, and the City of Scottsdale extending their Sonoran Preserve holdings, the Fountain Hills McDowell Mountain Preserve is now 882 acres of contiguous, undivided land. The Preserve extends from the southern mountains of Scottsdale to the McDowell Mountain Regional Park border to the north.

Adero Canyon Trailhead provides access to the Ridgeline Trail, Easy Access Trail, Overlook Trail, Western Loop Trail, Promenade Trail, and Lower Sonoran Trail.

Thank you. I am learning the Wiki ways.

BowenLarsen (talk) 00:38, 9 December 2020 (UTC)


I would like to change this copy - with factual information not from the town's website. When will I be allowed to do this?

BowenLarsen (talk) 16:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

BowenLarsen, Any time. Make sure the information is written in your own words. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:45, 9 December 2020 (UTC)


Dalton, California

California Historical Landmark sign quote.

  • There was no copyright violation here. A quote that is in italics and starts with this sign reads, is not a copyright violation. The quote had a reference to a picture of the sign and the state web site you noted. By this logic here every quote on wikipedia, italics or no italics, should be deleted now. Now if there was no italics and it looked like I was writing about the topic you would be correct. But I did not.

Thank you Telecine Guy (talk) 19:09, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Telecineguy, That hasn't persuaded me, but I'm not in a mood to fight about it. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:20, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sphilbrick/Archive_118&oldid=1003884697"