THC Science

List of Majjhima Nikaya suttas[edit]

Hey, I've actually checked the copyright on the edited content and it appears to be released at https://suttacentral.net/mn-mulapariyayavagga under a CC0 1.0 license, which would make it public domain and not a copyvio. Their licensing terms [1] clearly indicates that includes all text, design, software, and images created by SuttaCentral or persons working for SuttaCentral, on the domain suttacentral.net, or any domains or subdomains owned or managed by SuttaCentral, unless otherwise specified. I don't believe a revdel and removal of addition is necessary in this case. Dark-World25 (talk) 01:59, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's also at GitHub, where there is no detectable license. If their intention is to release it under license, the license should be visible at the top of the page. It's also present at this e-book, where there is no detectable license.

However the e-book lists Bhante Sujato as the author of the translations and indicates that the material is indeed licensed under a CC-0 public domain dedication. When copying compatibly licensed material, it's important to add attribution. So I will re-add the translations and add the attribution. Sorry for the mistake. I also found the same text at http://majjhimanikaya.sutta.mysticlotus.org/ but I now believe they have copied Sujato's work without attribution and are not the originators of the translations. — Diannaa (talk) 02:40, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Turnitin status[edit]

I see the current lack of CopyPatrol reports is caused by an outage at Turnitin. CopyPatrol habitués can bookmark these pages for the latest info:

— Diannaa (talk) 03:19, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa, are you getting a "502 Bad Gateway" when trying to load any of the iThenticate reports, or is it just me? DanCherek (talk) 20:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am getting it too. Do you think we should open a ticket, or wait a bit and see if the problem resolves on its own? I see it's apready been 40 minutes since you noticed it.— Diannaa (talk) 20:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I created a task at phab:T309816 to let the team know about it. It's my first time creating one on Phabricator, so please let me know if I seem to be missing anything important. Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 21:05, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well done young Jedi. I will add a few more subscribers.— Diannaa (talk) 21:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Daniels (politician)[edit]

Hi Diannaa, there appear to be copyright issues with content added here several times in the last week. I've reverted to a neutral version, but this may require some rev/deletion. Cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:0:0:0:4FAD (talk) 15:32, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 21:43, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. 2601:188:180:B8E0:0:0:0:4FAD (talk) 02:06, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

KFIT / KTSN AM Changes[edit]

Rather than continue spiking my updates to these pages, which are meant to show recent updates and show the most correct information, you could lend assistance. 2603:8080:6001:9C60:3DA5:F09A:FDC8:C5E8 (talk) 23:18, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much about page moves, so you are better off seeking help elsewhere. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 01:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) I can't quite figure it out myself. I'm not sure what's best here either, but the IP needs to use the article's talk page to explain what happened with the stations, with reliable sources. We'll try to figure it out from there. BilCat (talk) 01:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think what's needed is called a "round robin page move". I've never done one, and don't know how.— Diannaa (talk) 12:33, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recently deleted draft[edit]

Hey, I noticed that you were the admin who took action on the Rad Dixon draft. I strongly suspect that the account may be part of a larger UPE/sock ring given its name and the recreation of an previously deleted draft with the same contents. I've had a chat to User:GeneralNotability on discord about it and I was informed to compose information and then send it to wikipedia via email since it involves off wiki content (the now blocked creator of the page seems to indicate that they are part of a PR agency). I would very much appreciate it if you could keep an eye out for new accounts creating music and musician related pages that had previously been deleted or if you could help in any other way. Thanks, Dark-World25 (talk) 09:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I will watch for that kind of thing.— Diannaa (talk) 12:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Women in Media Association[edit]

Can you revdel from this diff up through my last edit, please. Copyvio taken from their about page. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And at Beyond_the_Farthest_Star_(film) [2] added by the same editor. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. In the future when removing the copyvio, if you could include the url where you found the matching content, that would be perfect. Thanks for everything, — Diannaa (talk) 19:39, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will do. I appreciate the help. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vallacar Transit Corporation/sandbox: promotion[edit]

Hi, I would like you to delete all the revisions on User:Vallacar Transit Corporation/sandbox because it's a promotion. Thank you.--143.44.165.97 (talk) 03:47, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a valid reason for deletion. Regardless, there's nothing there but an infobox.— Diannaa (talk) 13:54, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sigurd Hole[edit]

Hi Diannaa, could you take a look at the above article. I believe there's at least some copyright infringement based on the one source in the article, the subject's website. I'm going to be removing most of the body of the article anyway as blatantly promotional and unreliably sourced, but before I do that, it's probably best to clean up any infringement. (The original creator of the article was blocked for copyright infringement.)

Unfortunately, whatever is done, particularly my large removal, is not going to please the subject, Sigurd Hole, with whom I am already having a conversation, but there's not much that can be done about that.

Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 13:37, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright cleanup complete. Rev-del as well. Thanks for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 18:33, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not a bit, it's I who thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:17, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright[edit]

Hi @Diannaa, I hope you are well. A while ago you helped me understand copyright policies here, and I thought you may be able to help me again? I was editing Jonny Lake, a chef who has no free image available anywhere. I found one and tried to follow policy - I knew I had to upload directly to Wikipedia, not Commons, as it was a fair use claim. I left a detailed explanation for each of the 10 criteria. However it got flagged for deletion by a bot. I did try to defend the use but no human wrote back to me and it was deleted. I do not want to have the same thing happen, so I could like to run a hypothetical by you. I recently created Michael Sexton. Can I not use any of these images based on a fair use claim, as his portrait? What are the alternatives when an article subject has got no free photo? I understand that if lets say, I was adding a recent paparazzi photo of a celebrity into an article, then it does not respect the earning opportunity of the photographer and is less likely to be fair use. However one of the images listed, particularly an appropriate portrait taken from this article is I think far less likely to have earning opportunity or any risk of a claim against Wikipedia. That website does have a creative commons licence, but unhelpfully omits the type and so I cannot be sure it is compatible with our project.

TLDR; How can I get a portrait photo for an article on an individual if there is no free version? Do we just have to leave it without one? I am doing lots of public servants/judges where a photo would help the article.

Thanks! MaxnaCarter (talk) 08:32, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but we don't allow non-free photos of living people. NFCC#1 requires not only that no free image be available, but that one could not be created. Exceptions are very rare. So you won't be able to upload non-free pics of either of these people. See Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 December 8#File:Raymond Reierson.jpg for a detailed discussion of one case. — Diannaa (talk) 13:04, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Diannaa MaxnaCarter (talk) 01:17, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa, what if the person is now deceased? MaxnaCarter (talk) 01:18, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is typically allowed. — Diannaa (talk) 12:54, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

History of Maldives[edit]

Hi @Diannaa, I got a message citing copyright material being copied. The texts i wrote in the history of Maldives page was rephrased after reading it. I will be more careful when rewriting and phrase it better. Thank you

Mvrelics (talk) 18:58, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright warning[edit]

Hello Diannaa,

I’m confused because I don’t understand the following message:

Your edit to Abortion in China has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Content was added back in April. — Diannaa (talk) 14:21, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

- what material was copyrighted and how did I break a rule? I want to know so I don’t do it again.

Thanks, any answers can help me avoid this mistake in the future. Solidarityandfreedom (talk) 21:34, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You copied some text from The Guardian back in April. The problem was only discovered yesterday.— Diannaa (talk) 22:49, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Florida Space Institute[edit]

Hi Diannaa. I saw that most of the content that I had added to the Florida Space Institute wikipedia was taken down for copyright. I wrote this page on behalf of FSI and have explicit permission to use the text from the website, which I also manage. How can I add content from the website without having it taken down? Thanks, AlexMBrown (talk) 22:49, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If the copyright holder wishes to release this material under a compatible license, please see WP:Requesting copyright permission for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa (talk) 22:56, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hawala and crime[edit]

Hi @Diannaa: I removed a big block of copyvio from this Hawala and crime. It all taken from [3]. scope_creep^Talk 22:49, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It actually came from Hawala. Checking the user's contribs reveals all. Also note the edit summary on the initial edit, not a great attribution, but it's there. Purported source webpage is a Wikipedia mirror. — Diannaa (talk) 23:03, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution (second request)"[edit]

Hi Diannaa, sorry about copying from one WP article to another without attribution, it was an oversight. It struck me that the notice you left on my talk page had the header, "Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution (second request)". Are you keeping score? It seems odd to focus on a minor infraction rather than the thousands (literally) of free hours of work I've donated to Wikipedia. As you know, I think, I've removed quite a bit of copyvio material on WP myself. Carlstak (talk)

I'm not focusing on minor infractions, I am simply going through the reports at CopyPatrol like I do every day. https://copypatrol.toolforge.org/en/ — Diannaa (talk) 03:13, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What does "second request" mean? I get a 404 "Page Not Found" message with that link. Carlstak (talk) 04:00, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the dash in my signature was interfering with the url. It should work now.

"Second request" is because there was a first request. — Diannaa (talk) 12:06, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. So the wiki software is keeping score? At what point are sanctions imposed? Since copyvios of WP content are pretty straightforward, and the notices are so impersonal anyway, it seems to me these tasks could be handled by a bot, saving members of your project a lot of time, besides the fact that keeping score is insulting to hard-working editors. We waste so much time unnecessarily defending articles from damage by vandals, kooks, and cranks, when simply requiring all editors to register would eliminate a lot of it. I feel insulted, undervalued, and pilloried on top of the disrespect. Bemoaning in some quarters about the attrition of editors rings hollow. Carlstak (talk) 14:33, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that my action hurt your feelings. The way I personally handle these is to give 3-4 reminders and then give up, and then simply add the required attribution myself without notifying the editor that I have done so. Bots cannot handle the CopyPatrol tasks, for several reasons. I will post more info later when I get home from work if you are interested. — Ninja Diannaa (Talk) 15:57, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would be interested, thanks. The first request was from 8 July 2016, almost six years ago, so that being dredged up felt like a slap in the face. The "anybody can edit" policy makes some of us feel like drones doing constant clean up after vandals and idiots; I realize that "cleanup" is basically what you and other admins do, and I have great respect for that. It seems counterproductive that we have to do so much extra work because of that policy—I spend at least as much time doing cleanup and damage control as I do creating content. That makes me feel like Sisyphus, laboriously pushing that boulder up a hill only to have it roll back down, for all eternity. So the reminder of a six-year-old faux pas seems kinda cold.;-) Carlstak (talk) 15:12, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carlstak. You might look at the issue from my point of view. Attribution is required by the terms of our license. A user of your tenure should know that by now. I know that you do know it, because I told you so myself several years ago. If you don't include the attribution, I end up having to do so myself as part of clearing the items listed at CopyPatrol. Then I remind the editor that they should be doing this themselves. I typically do so regardless of the length of service of the involved editor or the quality or quantity of their edits. For you to come here and imply that I have done something wrong to remind you of this licensing requirement seems kinda backwards to me. I have done nothing wrong. — Diannaa (talk) 15:25, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do know it. It was a small oversight from six years ago, and so was the recent error. I didn't do such on purpose, but you seem to think I did. I find that insulting. So I have black marks against me forever in your book? I consider that harsh, especially considering how much time I've spent checking content that seemed to be copyvio, and removed it myself when it was. I didn't say you did anything wrong, I said dredging up a six-year-old faux pas seems "kinda cold". It's a cold case, and bringing it up seems nitpicky. Do other editors in your project do that? For the record, I don't mind being notified of a recent error, but excavating old transgressions seems needless. It's not like the first mistake happened yesterday.Carlstak (talk) 16:29, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. — Diannaa (talk) 16:35, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

follow up from my edit for Ben Cardin[edit]

Hi Diane,

You invited me to post my questions and follow up to your message on my Talk page.

TLDR: I think your accusations are actually false, but you permanently erased all record of my edit so it is impossible to prove now.

Oh ok...I was pretty sure I did it completely correctly actually. I would go prove it but I see you've permanently erased any and all records of my edit in the history of his article. So I'll take your word for it. But yeah pretty sure I didn't just copy and paste source material into Wikipedia, I definitely rewrote it in my own words and anything that was a quote was definitely in quotation marks. While your list of a bunch of things not to do that my edit supposedly violated is helpful, can you please give me a specific example - what exactly did I write that violated which rule? Because, like I said, my edit has completely vanished with strikethrough font from the official record of the page's history. I've never seen that before on Wikipedia. Crazy. Thank you in advance for providing me with the proof and concrete example, as it will be a good learning experience for me. :) --Eatthecrow (talk) 20:59, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the link to the copy and paste text you copied and pasted into my Talk page: User talk:Eatthecrow#c-Diannaa-2022-06-03T12:31:00.000Z-Wikipedia and copyright Eatthecrow (talk) 21:01, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 21:56, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should be good now?[edit]

Hi Diannaa. The content[4] has now been rewritten.[5] - LouisAragon (talk) 10:17, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's not ready - there's still some overlap. Please look at https://copypatrol.toolforge.org/en/?id=86112049 and click on the iThenticate report link. Some or all of the highlighted text is still present and needs to be re-written on your own words please. — Diannaa (talk) 12:21, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please correct me if mistaken, but are we looking at the same thing? Me and user:HistoryofIran largely rewrote the article here.[[6] As far as I can see, this new version doesn't contain copyvio's. The iThenticate report link is based on the original live version as far as I can see, and not the new rewritten version. - LouisAragon (talk) 12:50, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: I guess I have to copy-paste this new version into the live article? - LouisAragon (talk) 12:50, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit2: done[7] - LouisAragon (talk) 12:53, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't paste it into the article. It's not ready, and an admin or other experienced copyright is supposed to do that step. There's still a lot of overlap, with the content only lightly paraphrased, and a lot of remaining overlap. Content is presented in the same order using almost identical wording. Comparing with the iThenticate report, I see the following examples:

Source says "...been a western-related target of attack amidst political disputes between the Iraninan government ". Temp page says "persistently been a target of Iran's post-1979 dogma during political disputes the government and Western powers"
Source says "constant inclination...towards learning English has always outweighed...regime's restrictive policies". Temp page says "positive outlook of the people of Iran in relation to learning English has consistently outweighed the post-1979 Iranian regime's prohibitory policies".
Source says "Western style education and foreign languages started growing". Temp page says "Western-style education in addition to foreign languages started gaining prominence"

In conclusion, I've only checked the very first part of the temp page and have already found three examples that need to be re-worded. Spot checks elsewhere in the document show the problem is pervasive. Changing a few words here and there is inadequate paraphrasing. Content is presented in the same order using very similar wording and sentence structure. It needs to be completely re-written in your own words. — Diannaa (talk) 13:13, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the detailed response Diannaa. Well, then I would like to have the article deleted. Are you the right addressee for such a request? I just don't have the will nor time atm to rewrite/paraphrase it once again. I can re-create the article at some point in the future when I have more spare time. Sorry. - LouisAragon (talk) 13:29, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will delete it under G7, author requests deletion. (The temp page will be deleted too.) So sorry to have to do that. It's a very worthwhile topic and I hope you have time to get to it in the future. Best wishes, — Diannaa (talk) 13:37, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No worries Diana. You're doing what you're supposed to do and acting according the guidelines. I've just been a bit too zealous this time, should've spend a bit more time working on it. - LouisAragon (talk) 15:06, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding The Shepherd (The Chosen)[edit]

In regards to your comment on my draft of Draft:The Shepherd (The Chosen), I simply copied the plot section from the main article of The Chosen (TV series) about "The Shepherd", and it seems that this specific plot description was written way before [April 26, 2021], while on the other hand, the plot provided by the Fandom user was written later on [December 10, 2021], thus, the user who contributed on Fandom was the one who copied from the user here on Wiki and then pasted into that certain Fandom page. — Radiant Fellow (talk) 12:58, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the mistake. When you copy from one Wikipedia article to another, you need to provide attribution. This is done by saying in your edit summary that the material was copied, and where you got it. Please have a look at this edit summary for an example of how it is done. Please let me know if you have any questions, or have a look at WP:Copying within Wikipedia for more information. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 13:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How can I provide attribution? Can you do that for me? It seems I don't know how to apply it. The oldid is [[8]]. — Radiant Fellow (talk) 12:12, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is done in the edit summary at the time you add the content. Please have a look at this edit summary for an example of how it is done. If you forget to do it at the time you add the content, you can do it in a subsequent edit. — Diannaa (talk) 12:17, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Draft:Patrizio Pigliapoco[edit]

Is there no chance i can use public domain content? VictoriaSaintQueen (talk) 14:08, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How i can write without copyright article about this person I didn't know him personally, he is verified in Instagram and big engineer for Chris brown and Justin Bieber. VictoriaSaintQueen (talk) 14:28, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Paraphrase: Write It in Your Own Words. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study this module aimed at WikiEd students. — Diannaa (talk) 18:50, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa can you moved my draft to article space? if everything is ok, if isn't ok let me know what i do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VictoriaSaintQueen (talk • contribs) 11:38, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are nearly 3,000 drafts awaiting review. You will have to wait your turn. The draft will not be accepted in its current condition, because it's worded like an advertisement. I have done some more copyright cleanup too. — Diannaa (talk) 12:04, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel[edit]

Hello Diannaa, could you rev-del the copyright violations in Urali Gounder starting from 13th February. It was copied from etribaltribune.com by a blocked sock Gounder parambarai and now resumed using IP socks. The same was probably added first by the same user on 12th February and was rev-deleted. Could you also protect the page since the present disruption started 5 days after the 3 month protection expired. Thanks. - SUN EYE 1 06:15, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All done. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa (talk) 11:40, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. - SUN EYE 1 15:37, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution[edit]

Hello, Diannaa. You may remember me from this discussion, where you helped me provide attribution from the copied storylines section in Andrea Somers. I have read through Template:Copied, but I am still struggling to understand how to do it. I was wondering if you could please help me provide attribution on Harlow Robinson (Neighbours), where the storylines section was copied from List of Neighbours characters (2019). Kind regards, - Therealscorp1an (talk) 22:49, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When providing attribution, the edit summary is the part that is mandatory. It is done in the edit summary at the time you add the content. Please have a look at this edit summary for an example of how it is done. State whether the content was copied or moved. If you forget to do it at the time you add the content, you can do it in a subsequent edit. The template is optional. For the template, I use a simplified version that I keep in a sandbox. It looks like this:

{{Copied
|from       = 
|to         = 
|to_diff    = 
|date       = 
}}

For your particular usage, the template would be like this:

{{Copied
|from       = List of Neighbours characters (2019)
|to         = Harlow Robinson (Neighbours)
|to_diff    = 1092702641
|date       = June 12, 2022
}}

As you probably know, each edit has a unique numerical identifier that can be found at the end of that diff's url. So the number to place in the "to_diff" field is the diff number of the edit where you added the content. The template is placed on the talk page of both the article where you found the text and the article you copied/moved it to. — Diannaa (talk) 14:06, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 20:04, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pokémon Ultimate Journeys: The Series[edit]

Hi @Diannaa: Reviewed this article Pokémon Ultimate Journeys: The Series at page review . I had to remove a block of copyvio. It came up on Earwig as a straight copy. scope_creep^Talk 17:01, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to have come from Pokémon Master Journeys: The Series along with a lot of other plot descriptions. Please see the edit summary in this diff where they provide attribution as to where these plot descriptions came from. By the way if you could do me a favour and tell me in the future where you found the matching content? It usually helps also to paste the url where you found the matching content into your edit summary when you do the removal. I might be able to tell whether or not the place where you found the matching plot summary is a Wikipedia mirror. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 19:36, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep All of those summaries from the Pokémon Ultimate Journeys: The Series article is my own writing. So, if you're seeing copies of summaries on another site, that means that my work has been copied and pasted from the Wikipedia article. Yowashi (talk) 20:44, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Yowashi: Yes, I thought it was the other way around. It was one entry in that list that came up in Earwig, so I thought one entry had been copied across for quickness. To be honest, I tend to avoid these kind of articles as I don't know about much about them. I will try and watch for it the next time. scope_creep^Talk 20:50, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removed article Karene Agono[edit]

Hi @Diannaa: I know the rules. But don't you think it was best to flag the article rather than removing it completely? Maybe then I would have looked into the copyright violation and corrected it. Don't you see it as a better approach?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopilo12 (talk • contribs)

There's certainly more than one approach to copyright cleanup. I chose to remove the copied content, as is permitted by the policy. Might I suggest that you go back to the page where you got the text and try again? — Diannaa (talk) 18:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]