User talk:Moneytrees/Archive 8

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Moneytrees. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I'm not seeing the Barbados Holetown Festival can be a copyvio of a page that doesn't appear to have existed before 2017. What am I missing here? Guettarda (talk) 01:36, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Guettarda, This is rather complicated, and I was actually thinking of bringing this to another copyright admin for review. I'm currently cleaning out the edits of the articles creator (Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Dr. Blofeld 36), and came across the aforementioned article. Before putting the article through Earwig, I decided to archive the sole reference using User:Moneytrees/dummy, since most of the links in the investigation have been dead. I saw what you saw too, that the first archive was in 2017, meaning that our article likely existed prior to it and making it look like the website copied from wikipedia and that someone had inserted it as a reference (which some newbies commonly do). I was preparing to mark it as no violation, but something gave me pause when I looked at the history; the website appears to have existed before 2017, under a different name. Specifically, the link seems to have been inserted under a different name in feb 2010, It was marked as dead in 2016, and it was changed to the current link in 2019. This makes me think that the link inserted in 2010 was the same as the current link in the article, and the new link was just where the content had been moved after the previous site likely lost the domain. Since that would mean the content existed in 2010, which is much closer to the articles creation, and Dr.B didn't always site sources, I believed that the article had been a somewhat paraphrased version of the website from the start before it was phrased into the direct copy it is now. Sorry for the over complicated explanation, my attempt to elaborate in the edit summary "and some other page" wasn't very insightful. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 16:16, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. And looking at that copyright investigation, I see that there's reason to be suspicious. Thanks also for doing that cleanup work. Guettarda (talk) 15:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Good evening I am the girl friend of Paolo Marraffa. Can you review his page? Thanks from me and Paolo Eleonoracacia98 (talk) 20:39, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

no. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 22:48, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

No need, its up for deletion as G11 and the user is up for a block at SPI. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:26, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek, I'm not really sure what's going on here, but it's clearly a waste of time. Both accounts blocked, and Draft nuked. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 22:53, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

THodson (talk · contribs) added again material that you recently changed to hidden due to WP:COPYVIO issues on Transtheoretical model; you may want to do the same again. Biogeographist (talk) 18:12, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Biogeographist, Done. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 20:31, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Moneytrees - thought I'd save Diannaa from my pestering her with copyright questions and try one out on you! See recent edits at River Phoenix - a user has switched the photo. Clearly the new picture is better, but it looks like a still from a film. Clicking through to the file, they've asserted that they got it from IMDB, but that it's CC4.0 - does that sound right to you? Don't know much about IMDB myself, are all their pics CC? GirthSummit _(blether) 14:24, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Girth Summit, it’s ok, Diannaa needs a break sometimes (her talk page is basically the copyright noticeboard!) per their TOU and this help page, IMDb does not release their photos under a cc license, and get their movie photos from studios for exclusive use. That image is very unlikely to have been released under a cc 4.0 license. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 15:10, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Moneytrees, that's what I reckoned. What's the right approach to take - revert on EnWiki and nominate for deletion on commons? GirthSummit _(blether) 15:25, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Girth Summit, I've done both (Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:River Phoenix1.jpg). Given this edit, I think this may be some sort of vandalism. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 16:05, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Moneytrees, I don't think it's vandalism - from the series of iterative changes, I'd guess it was someone trying to figure out how to get it to put the version of the file they wanted - maybe the file was called it river.jpg when they saved it locally to their PC, and they renamed it when they uploaded it? Anyway, thanks for taking those steps - I'm pretty fuzzy on dealing with stuff on commons, not my natural domain! Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 16:57, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

I see that you reversed a number of edits that were made by User:Cjperez21 to the article on Cord-marked pottery. I would like to know the methodology that you used to identify the copyright violation. I'm especially grateful for your providing a URL for the source material. We can discuss this here or on my own talk page, where you will find information about the student assignment for which this work was submitted. I'm concerned that other portions of this article may have also been reproduced without permission Hoopes (talk) 19:40, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Hoopes, I'll gladly tell you; one of their edits was flagged as a possible copyright violation by copypatrol, which scans edits for copyright violations. The report can be seen here; click on "iThenticate report" to see the violation. As you can see, the text is identical; I looked a bit to see if the content had been released under a free license, but I found no evidence that it was. I only removed the content inserted in this edit, and left the other content alone, as it hadn't been flagged. I deleted the revisions in between in accordance with our policy on copyright, although I'm not a big fan of doing that since it muddles page history. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 22:09, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

You said in my user talk page: "You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content" What's the difference between information and content? And "you must write using your own words". So I've edited many words in Body non piercing jewelery to avoid same to every word in sentences, so I don't know why it's still violate copyright? AneHara (talk) 00:38, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

AneHara, Sorry, but your edits were too closely phrased to http://jewelry.lovetoknow.com/Non_Piercing_Jewelry. Please look at the copypatrol report to understand why I reverted you; click on the "iThenticate Report". Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 01:10, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Moneytrees. I see you deleted the Kingdom Force article. Do you know anyone else who can cite information in their own words? --ZanyDragon (talk) 16:50, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

ZanyDragon, I'm not quite sure what you're asking, but if you're interested in seeing the over lap between the what you wrote vs. the source, see this copypatrol report. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 16:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

The thing is, I am unsure if anyone else thought to make an article about the show. I'm not always good at phrasing things in my own words. Sometimes I need help with that. --ZanyDragon (talk) 16:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

ZanyDragon, That's ok, copyright and what counts as close wording can be pretty hard to understand; even experienced contributors can have trouble with it, and the article wasn't that extreme of a violation.

If you want to create it again, I recommend changing the lede to:

Kingdom Force is a CBC/Radio-Canada children's television series created by Matt Fernandes. The series is about the adventures of an animal superhero team.

When it comes to this kind of stuff, try and boil down what the source is saying to the simplest words, Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 17:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Sometimes, choosing the best words and media is easier said than done. And it's not hard to see the reason.

I remember the time I was banned from TV Tropes. --ZanyDragon (talk) 17:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, my name is Mitumba Johnson. I read the previous Second Congo War and find it a bit confusing and the writer has not provided a logical explanation for the Second Congo War which leads me to modify the article and I was flabbergasted that you removed my article and said you “find it a test bit.” You could have read it instead of just removing it because you don’t like it. I finally read my article and I didn’t find anything wrong with it. Please tell me what I did wrong because every time I edit any summary regarding the Congo affairs my summaries gets removed for no reason. The author claimed that the Banyamulenge were in Congo before colonization, but there is no evidence to reinforce his claim that the Banyamulenge existed in Congo before colonization, nor is there any Banyamulenge chiefdom that exist in Eastern Congo before colonization? I am not against the Banyamulenge but the Rwandan regime has played big role in Congolese affairs and the notion that “the Banyamulenge existed in the Congo before colonization and were killed by another ethnic group” is irrelevant because there was no Banyamulenge in Congo. There was the excuse Paul Kagame was using to invade Congo while asserting it was an invasion to defend the Banyamulenge.

Take a good look at this pictures see how peaceful Banyamulenge are: [1] https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-a905719dbd889c57700056bfb88bbc8a [2] https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-f891952f1f232ebf300de02a01c8fc7f [3] https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-b2023601db1d0257baeae69d52df57bb [4] https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-02e27b192faa7030e4edc9abf689b1a4 So I guess all this 9,000 kids were genocidaires, right? Banyamulenge they’re heartless ruthless criminals who’ve been killing indigenous Congolese in that area for over 20 years while also creating a rural community called Minembwe which they’ve turned it into a customary community and installed Tutsis chieftaincy in that area and shamelessly claimed to have been mistreated by other ethnic groups. Bantus have been in Eastern Congo before the Neolithic and in the year of the Lord, its very well documented and have advance kingdoms and Tutsi (were known as Banyarwanda) were later brought in Congo in 19 century to work for labour but many Tutsis have now claimed to have lived in Congo before colonization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitumba (talk • contribs) 00:30, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Mitumba, I have no knowledge or opinion on the matter, the reason I reverted your edit was because you accidentally included several irelevant citations. Since I didn't think "The effect of adrenaline and of alpha- and beta-adrenergic blocking agents on ATP concentration and on incorporation of 32Pi into ATP in rat fat cells" had anything to do with the subject, nor had to be cited that many times, I reverted it as a test edit. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 01:08, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I see that, but how can I edit the Second Congo War summary because you’ve removed the summary? I want to modify the topographical errors that I made — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitumba (talk • contribs) 04:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

If you want to change the errors without being reverted, I recommend pasting the text into your sandbox, (User:Mitumba/sandbox) where you can fix the citations without worrying about people reverting you. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 15:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Mitumba I'm saying you should paste the contents of your edit into your sandbox, where you can remove the citations without the worry of someone removing your work. If you're asking about editing your edit summary on Second Congo War, edit summaries can't be changed, sorry. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 00:00, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I do not understand. So, I’m going to use the link you send me (User:Mitumba/sandbox) to correct my citation? Or will I use the link you send (User:Mitumba/sandbox) to write again the “Second Congo War” summary or do you want me to fix my reference so that you can copy my citation to fix the reference of my previous summary? Please elaborate!

So, you are essentially saying that I can only edit the citation but not edit the Second Congo War article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitumba (talk • contribs) 03:38, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Mitumba, I think you should paste what you are going to insert Second congo war into your sandbox, fix it there, and then paste it into the article. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 23:23, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Moneytrees. I've never used the Upload Wizard before, so I may need a visual walkthrough as to how it's done. Especially if the picture is a copyrighted logo. --ZanyDragon (talk) 23:04, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

ZanyDragon, Simply clicking on the "Click here to start the Upload Wizard" will provide you with some pretty easy instructions. On the topic of logos, read Wikipedia:Logos#Copyright concerns; which should answer your questions. If the logo is just some text or a simple geometric shape, it is not copyrightable. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 23:29, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello there. This is an invitation to join the 50,000 Destubbing Challenge Focus of the Week. £250 (c. $310) up for grabs in May, June and July with £20 worth of prizes to give away every week for most articles destubbed. Each week there is a different region of focus, though half the prize will still be rewarded for articles on any subject. Sign up if you want to contribute at least one of the weeks or support the idea! † Encyclopædius 19:16, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

I revised the City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks page to work around the copyright issues you pointed out. You were right, I did not do enough to put the article into my own words. Please review it, it now passes the EarWig copyright violation. --Wil540 art (talk) 20:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Wil540 art, Thank you for rephrasing it. I rephrased a tiny bit more, although I understand that it's hard to given the subject. If you are using material from another website to build an article up, please reword it in a google/word doc before instead of creating an article. That way you can avoid copyright troubles. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 21:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Moneytrees! I posting here to in addition to what you hade posted on my talk page. I’m sure what I posted there will come to your attention. Following is a repeat so if you read the message on my response to your posting on my talk page then ignore the following :) The changes and additions I made were to remove the false narrative that is put on the site by Usaamo. The narrative incites violence as it is racist. The racism stems from politics of Pakistanis against Indians and Sikhs. I did violate any copyright as the corrections I made were directly from Sikhnet (where some scholarly articles are written and have copyrights released - I cited to this website but someone said “Sikhnet maybe biased” without even understanding what the organization does). Please understand that racists will hurt minorities and Usaamo posted a very wrong narrative (false completely). The citations I put on what I had written are researched articles from scholars. I don’t understand why it is so difficult to correct a false narrative while you have allowed the racist false narrative to be added to the site that directly hurt the minority Sikhs. Recently there have been attacks on Sikhs in Afghanistan and Pakistan (in the news). And false narratives can cause more violence. I am genuinely trying my best to put the correct narrative and if you had read what was written it shows facts of harmony in a pluralistic society. I was respectful. I feel that no kindness has been shown and facts have been attacked. There is absolutely no copyright infringement of the citation I made. To the contrary the citation directly resolve the very issue I’m trying to put up on the cite. However, I understand that being a Sikh minority we will always be under attack and always have to explain. I also understand that you may not understand Sikh history and how narratives put up by outside religious groups (not that neither Usaamo nor User:RedBulbBlueBlood9911 are experts in Sikh history and most probably have ulterior motives to ruin Sikhism). If you still feel compelled to remove the truth (even for logistical reasons) then at the very least please remove the false violent (and violence causing) narrative put up by Usaamo. Even the citation he cites do not say what he claims (in his own words). Keep the cite locked if you wish after the removal. Please understand this is a Very Very sensitive issue. I have informed a few established organizations today with direct links to the US gov (Saldef, Sikh Coalition, and Sikh Research Institute) and if need be we will be forming the FBI and Interpol regarding this issue so that Wikipedia can be contacted directly. I suggest if you want the truth feel free to contact Saldef, Sikh Coalition, and Sikh Research Institute. You will realize I am correct as to the narrative. I really do not want anyone to get in trouble but I can assure you the people putting up false narratives and deleting the truth will be held accountable (not you as you are an administrator and I have informed you of the issue at hand). Both Usaamo and RedBulbBlueBlood9911 will be reported to authorities but I hope you can prevent anything worse from happening. RedBulbBlueBlood9911 seems to be only 16 yrs old and with too much authoritative power on Wikipedia. If he ends up legally being held responsible for inciting violence the Indian gov will not be nice. I want to avoid all this. So at this time I humbly request that you at least all posts made by Usaamo (it’s just a small false paragraph). If you feel the page needs to be locked/protected after that then I leave that to your professional judgement. But as long as the false narrative on Sikhs from the the Muslim Pakistani Usaamo (note there is a conflict of interest by Usaamo), this issue will remain a Very big issue and all actions will be taken to stop false news and false narrative that incite violence. I thank you for your understanding and hope you take appropriate action. And again feel free to contact Sikhnet, Sikh Coalition, Saldef, and/or Sikh Research Institute if you want to at least know that what Usaamo put is a false narrative. JohnSMalik47 (talk) 02:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Could you delete this one? SemiHypercube 18:30, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

SemiHypercube,  Done. Nice to see you more active- and what do you know, I'm an admin now! See you around. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 19:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! SemiHypercube 13:41, 2 May 2020 (UTC)