January 2020, Volume 6, Issue 1, Numbers 146, 148, 149, 150, 151, 153 Happy Holidays from all of us at Women in Red, and thank you for your support in 2019. We look forward to working with you in 2020! Online events: New: Activists / Public domain / Geofocus: Central America / Year-long campaign: Sports! Continuing: 2019 deaths / #1day1woman Editor feedback: Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Chartered_Institute_for_the_Management_of_Sport_and_Physical_Activity

Thank you for flagging the copyright violation. I agree with the removal. However, there was other content that was removed that did not come from the website you flagged. This included infobox additions, a new section, and other text in the introduction not related to the vision/mission paragraphs.

I have reintroduced these elements onto the page. I will leave mission/vision absent.

COI on my profile. Happy to add elsewhere if needed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Reece_at_CIMSPA

While it may not seem like the right thing to do, it is convention, when identifying a copyright issue, to do a rollback, which sometimes picks up other copyright issues and sometimes picks up inrelated,a nd non-problematic issues. You are always welcome to restore the non-copyright issue edits.

"May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a ..Merry Christmas.. and a ..Happy New Year.., whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you ..warm greetings.. for Christmas and New Year 2021."

Happy editing,
User:245CMR

Hi Sphilbrick, I see you've been adding some Mathworld citations today. Maybe you are aware of these past discussions, but I would point you to them just in case: Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_432#MathWorld and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics/Archive/2024/Mar#Is_Wolfram_Mathworld_reliable?. All the best, JBL (talk) 21:41, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've read and I will respond. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:04, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

added post here:

RS Mathworld revisited S Philbrick(Talk) 16:42, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With thanks for your recent help (including correcting for my error in the tag), as you're listed here, would you mind perhaps taking a quick look here? IMO this falls under RD4 (as oversightable on MPJI/KIDS/BLPNAME grounds). Not the 'worst' example. But maybe worth redaction. Guliolopez (talk) 21:48, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, and I used to have that tool but I don't at the moment. Please see how to contact at [[Wikipedia:Requests for oversight S Philbrick(Talk) 21:59, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Logo of Wakulla County Florida in 2013.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 03:31, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | March 2025, Vol 11, Issue 3, Nos. 326, 327, 332, 333, 334 Online events: New: Alphabet run E & F | Artists+Activists | Women of the Arab World Continuing, year-long initiatives: #1day1woman | Music Announcements from other communities: March editathons around the world Celebrate Women 2025 office hour series Tip of the month: You can access the Wikipedia Library if you have made 500+ edits, and 6+ months editing, and 10+ edits in the last 30 days, and No active blocks Moving the needle:[1] 27 Jan 2025: 20.031% of biographies on EN-WP are about women (2,047,793 bios, 410,200 women) 23 Dec 2024: 20.009% (2,041,741 bios, 408,531 women) Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 1,669 articles during this period! Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 08:53, 25 February 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Good evening. My in-progress draft on the topic, Groww, was deleted, despite it being an encyclopedic draft on the company. I assure you I am in no way, shape, or form connected to the company, and have no malicious intentions. I was working on a neutral, unbiased draft on Groww, and it was deleted without any explanation. Could I request undeletion of the draft? Any copyright violations and/or infringements, if pointed out, shall be removed by me. Thankyou, 2311afaepw4 (talk) 17:17, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever I remove a portion of an article I provide an explanatory note in the edit summary as well as additional explanation to the talk page of registered editors. I realize because the draft is been deleted you did not see the edit summary. I thought the system automatically dropped a note on the editors talk page in the case of the deletion but that doesn't appear to be the case. That doesn't sound like a good process and perhaps somebody will look into that.

I did look at the content of your draft and it looked to me like a very close paraphrase of this site.

Do you see it differently? S Philbrick(Talk) 18:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledge the error that has occurred from my side and apologize for the mistake caused. Could you please undelete the draft. I'll ensure that this time I do not make the same mistake again and make all the the necessary changes to the article. Thank you! 2311afaepw4 (talk) 01:57, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I copied the contents and emailed to you. Good luck. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:10, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@2311afaepw4:Sorry, I should have let you know I was responding. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted my edits because of a wrong source in a way that I cannot see these edits any more. You could have told me in another way, I would have found a new source! Now all work is gone! At least I cannot see it. If you still can see it, please return it to me, so I can find the correct sources! Lova Falk (talk) 14:23, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
PS The later edits that I made were NOT made with the source https://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/pages/Z/A/ZaderatskyVsevolod.htm but with another source!Lova Falk (talk) 14:25, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on the phone, will respond shortly. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:27, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please share the other source so I can see if it is acceptable licensed. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:27, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The latest edits were all made with this one: https://varianty.lviv.ua/publikatsiyi/avanhard-zaderatskoho#google_vignette

Thanks for providing the source.

That source is fully copyrighted.

I'm sorry that my edits seems so abrupt. Wikipedia is committed to respecting copyrights. Eevery week, hundreds of editors are not fully aware of this requirement and add copyrighted material to articles. It would be nice if we had sufficient resources to handle it differently but there are a small handful of people monitoring reports about potential copyright, and it is our current practice to immediately revert any violations of our copyright policy. It is also our practice, when a copyright issue is identified, to do a rollback of all consecutive edits by the same editor. If you have thoughts on how this process could be improved I'm all ears.

I did send a copy of the article reflecting your edits to you by email.

Please make sure to use your own words or use exact words if short and in quotes and attributed. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:13, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for sending me the edits, however, I haven't yet received anything. I checked my preferences and the email address there is correct. Is it possible that some old email adress of me is somewhere else registered in WP?

My next question to you: how do you see that https://varianty.lviv.ua/publikatsiyi/avanhard-zaderatskoho#google_vignette is fully copyrighted? I have also this source: https://rivnenchanka.info/uk/stvoryuvav-shedevry-navit-v-koncztabori-vsevolod-zaderaczkyj-pianist-i-kompozytor-z-rivnogo-pro-yakogo-malo-hto-znaye Is this copyrighted?

I see what I did wrong, I tried again and you can now check your email; will look into and respond to your other questions shortly. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:57, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The email has arrived, thank you for that! However, the version you sent to me is not at all the latest version that I created. Please - if possible - send me the latest version. I had made a sub-section called Music with a lot of text. Lova Falk (talk) 16:01, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the bottom of the page you will see this notice:

© Copyright 2018-2024.

The other site has a similar notice but I think it's in Ukrainian.

However, if you don't find a notice that doesn't mean it's not copyrighted. Very roughly speaking, anything published in the last century (1929 or later in the US for printed material) is probably subject to copyright unless it is public domain (e.g. US federal employees work) or explicitly licensed in a way that can be used. Unfortunately, copyright can be complicated and it varies by country. S Philbrick(Talk) 16:05, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your explanation! If possible, could you send me the latest version of the page that you reverted?

Furthermore, I have a question. None of the text that I used was verbatim from the source - that was in Ukrainian as you noted. Everything was rewritten (and summarised) in my own words. My question is, if I use my own words, is it not allowed to use copyrighted material as a source? Lova Falk (talk) 16:09, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the version I sent you did not have section on music which perplexes me because I deliberately chose the most recent version before my reversion. I haven't figured out why and I don't see any good reason to figure out what went wrong — I tried again with the most recent version and it does have the section on music. S Philbrick(Talk) 16:11, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is more general information regarding copyright at the Wikipedia article on the subject:

Copyright

The article does note that copyright does cover translation of text so you cannot simply translate copyrighted text and use it, you must write it in your own words

____________________________________________________________________________________________________ S Philbrick(Talk) 16:15, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! The section is there. I checked WP:copyright, and it states clearly: "Since most recently-created works are copyrighted, almost any Wikipedia article which cites its sources will link to copyrighted material. It is not necessary to obtain the permission of a copyright holder before linking to copyrighted material, just as an author of a book does not need permission to cite someone else's work in their bibliography." So what did I do wrong? I put the Ukrainian text in Google translate, and then rewrote in my own words. How is this a copy violation? Lova Falk (talk) 16:16, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is evening in Sweden now, and I turn off the computer. Please reconsider your reverts of this page. I did rephrase the text that I found in the sources. Good night! Lova Falk (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi S Philbrick(Talk), I see that you have been back and done some edits. Would you please address this. I would like to work more on this article, but I cannot do this when you will revert my edits. Lova Falk (talk) 09:27, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't done any edits other than the initial one to remove your copyright violations.

As you noted above, "any Wikipedia article which cites its sources will link to copyrighted material. It is not necessary to obtain the permission of a copyright holder before linking to copyrighted material,...."

That statement is in there because some people were under the impression the providing a link to copyrighted material was a violation of the copyright. It is not. It is not only permissible to link to copyrighted material, it's required. If you translated some text and then rewrote in your own words it's not a copyright violation. I have no idea whether that occurred in this case as I have not looked at any of your edits after my rollback. I've now looked and you have not made any additional edits so when you say you "did rephrase the text that I found in the sources", I don't know what you mean because there are no new edits. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:13, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have made no new edits after your rollback, because I was not sure if you would reverse them again. When I say that I rephrased the text that I found in the sources, I mean that when working with this article, all the time I translated what I found, then rephrased, then made the edit in the article. But I understand that there was one edit that I did not rephrase? So now I will redo the other edits that you also removed. I will also be extra careful to not copy the text. Lova Falk (talk) 16:12, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time for this. I try to be very sympathetic to editors who inadvertently violate copyright rules because they very often new to editing and don't know how this place works. It appears to me you have 18 years of editing experience, over 25K edits, have qualified to be a pending change reviewer and rollbacker. I'm dealing with some personal issues and you persuaded me it's time to step away from Wikipedia. Please visit the teahouse if you have additional questions. S Philbrick(Talk) 16:23, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to hear that you are not doing so fine, and thank you for spending so much time and energy to me. I get too upset - afterwards I know it, but in the middle of it, I am simply too upset. I am sorry. It is true that I am an experienced editor, but I am also a returning editor after an eleven years gap. Some things I have forgotten, and other things have changed since then, and I am still finding out and making mistakes. But how could you know that? For the record, if you would have told me to turn to the Teahouse with my questions, I would immediately have done that, but I have always read that it is better to sort things out with the editor one has an issue with, instead of asking others to help. Anyway, TL;DR I am sorry and I wish you well! Lova Falk (talk) 16:49, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sharing, that helps explain some things that making sense to me. You are absolutely right it is definitely better to start with the editor and only go to other venues if that doesn't work out. It wasn't my intention to suggest that you should have started with the teahouse. The situation is I have a brother for whom I am the guardian, and he has some severe health problems which has necessitated me stepping away from Wikipedia for a while. I mentioned the teahouse because I can't commit to helping you in a timely way and wanted you to have another option. Best of luck with the article. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:59, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2025).

Administrator changes

• Jarry1250
• Lethe

CheckUser changes

• AmandaNP
• Drmies

Oversighter changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is open to discuss whether AI-generated images (meaning those wholly created by generative AI, not human-created images modified with AI tools) should be banned from use in articles.
• A series of 22 mini-RFCs that double-checked consensus on some aspects and improved certain parts of the administrator elections process has been closed (see the summary of the changes).
• A request for comment is open to gain consensus on whether future administrator elections should be held.

Technical news

• A new filter has been added to the Special:Nuke tool, which allows administrators to filter for pages in a range of page sizes (in bytes). This allows, for example, deleting pages only of a certain size or below. T378488
• Non-administrators can now check which pages are able to be deleted using the Special:Nuke tool. T376378

Miscellaneous

• The 2025 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, Arcticocean, Ameisenigel, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, Galahad, Nehaoua, Renvoy, Revi C., RoySmith, Teles and Zafer as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2025 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: 1234qwer1234qwer4, AramilFeraxa, Daniuu, KonstantinaG07, MdsShakil and XXBlackburnXx.

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of a group of Wikipedians to better understand their experiences! We are also looking to interview some survey respondents in more detail, and you will be eligible to receive a thank-you gift for the completion of an interview. The outcomes of this research will shape future work designed to improve on-wiki experiences.

We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this survey, which shouldn’t take more than 2-3 minutes. You may view its privacy statement here. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Kind regards, Sam Walton (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 67, January – February 2025

• East View Press and The Africa Report join the library
• Spotlight: Wikimedia+Libraries International Convention and WikiCredCon
• Tech tip: Suggest page

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --18:48, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You said "While truly bad sources are worse than nothing, I think sources that may be less than gold standard are far better than the sea of unsourced claims." I heartily agree, and I think it also applies to restrictions on sources. To my mind, it's why slavishly following WP:MEDRS causes bad editing. — Charles Stewart (talk) 14:15, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, a lot to chew on, I'm currently on a bit pf a hiatus from Wikipedia between basketball season and some personal issues, but hope to get re-involved in another couple months. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:30, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | April 2025, Vol 11, Issue 4, Nos. 326, 327, 335, 336 Online events: New: Alphabet run G & H | Business Continuing, year-long initiatives: #1day1woman | Music Announcements (Events facilitated by others): The European Destubathon – a stub improvement contest/editathon from 1–30 April 2025 Tip of the month: When creating biographies, don't forget to use Template:DEFAULTSORT. Accessible from "Wiki markup" at the foot of the page being edited, it allows categories to be listed under the subject's family name rather than their first or given name. Moving the needle: (statistics available via Humaniki tool) 24 Mar 2025: 20.070% of biographies on EN-WP are about women (2,057,083, 412,857 women) 27 Jan 2025: 20.031% (2,047,793 bios, 410,200 women) Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 2,657 articles during this period! Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 13:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2025).

Administrator changes

• Giraffer
• Goldsztajn

Dennis Brown

• Cyclonebiskit
• Nohat
• Someguy1221

Bureaucrat changes

Barkeep49

CheckUser changes

0xDeadbeef

Oversighter changes

GB fan

Moneytrees

Miscellaneous

• Sign up for The Core Contest, a competition running from 15 April to 31 May to improve vital articles.

Hi, I see that you reverted my addition of a "Plot" section in the article The Nephews of Zorro as it is supposedly a copyright violation of this blog article from August 26, 2012. However, the plot i posted was actually a translation of the plot from the Italian Wikipedia, which has been there since September 1, 2009 and has been virtually unchanged since then. The blog must have been copied and translated from the Italian Wikipedia. 62.211.140.57 (talk) 16:14, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PLease explain this in the edit summary and that will help. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:08, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | May 2025, Vol 11, Issue 5, Nos. 326, 327, 337, 338 Online events: New: Revolutionary women | Alphabet run I & J Continuing, year-long initiatives: #1day1woman | Music Announcements (events facilitated by others): WikiProject Women in Green - a Good Article editathon from 1-31 May 2025 Progress ("moving the needle"): Statistics available via Humaniki tool. Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 1,269 articles during this period! 21 Apr 2025: 20.090% of EN-WP biographies are about women (2,061,363; 414,126 women) 24 Mar 2025: 20.070% (2,057,083 bios; 412,857 women) Tip of the month: Those of you who experience harassment while trying to create or improve articles about women are welcome to bring your problems to our attention on the Women in Red talk page. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Lajmmoore (talk 09:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

15:09, 21 April 2025 Sphilbrick talk contribs deleted page Paul J. Spangler (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: https://siarchives.si.edu/collections/siris_arc_217574) (thank)

SI Archives, like all US government publications, are not subject to copyright. Somebody who is a specialist in copyright infringement ought to be aware of that. Please undelete the page. Abrower (talk) 17:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Much of my Wikipedia work relates to sports articles, for which the Sports Illustrated archives are a common source. The Copypatrol tool identified the source of the material as siarchives.si.edu. I mistakenly thought it was a reference to the Sports Illustrated archives. Additionally the URL ends in .edu which is not a common identifier for the US government.

Your suggestion that someone knowledgeable about copyright ought to automatically know that the SI archives are not subject to copyright is not quite true.

Check out the terms of use. Those state that content marked with the "Creative Commons Zero icon CC0 is made available under the Creative Commons Zero (CC0) license. This Content is not protected by copyright and may be used for commercial and noncommercial purposes without fee or copyright restriction; however, the CC0 icon pertains only to the copyright status of the Content. The Smithsonian does not guarantee that all Content marked with the CC0 icon is free from rights other than copyright, including rights held by third parties, or that use of such Content might not be subject to other laws, such as rights of publicity or privacy. "

They go on to note that if the icon isn't present, then the material cannot be used "without further permission from the Smithsonian".

In other words, your blanket statement implying everything in the archives is copyright free is not correct.

Here's the page containing the content you used. I searched but have not located the icon indicating that it can be used without further permission. Do you see it?

Nevertheless my rationale for deleting was my mistaken assumption that it was Sports Illustrated content. While the lack of the icon suggests it may not be copyright free, it is clearly not unambiguous to me, so I've restored it.

It may well trigger another report in the Copypatrol tool. If you can find definitive evidence that this material is free of copyright it would be helpful to add a note to the talk page so that other reviewers will understand the status. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:01, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw you reverted my good faith edits to the "Unwrapped" TV show page due to lack of sources. The descriptions of the episodes are from the official Food Network Unwrapped website, and I cited them at the top of the episodes section title. Please let me know if this is the right protocol for adding episode descriptions. Thank you. Eggie88 (talk) 01:24, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I am packing for a weekend trip and leaving literally in minutes. I will look into this when I returned next week to be more definitive but you stated that the descriptions came from the official website which is almost certainly subject to copyright so is not acceptable. It's a great source if you want to write the summaries in your own words and provide a reference to the official source but you can't just use their words unless they explicitly licensed them.

Send me a reminder post on Tuesday if this doesn't satisfactorily answer your question. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:25, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Materialscientist#Confused. Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 12:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to be sorry for.  I do a fair amount of CopyPatrol work, and many copyvios are obvious but some are tricky. It's been my experience that when an editor with a lot of edits makes an edit that triggers the CopyPatrol tool, there is a chance something's going on that's not obvious. I've made it my practice to check with the editor in such cases. I'm not disagreeing with you that it is almost certainly a copyvio, but I remain puzzled that a copyvio was reinstated by Materialscientist. However, given that it's been removed I'm going to move on. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2025).

Administrator changes

Rusalkii

NaomiAmethyst (overlooked last month)

• Master Jay
• Orderinchaos
• Roger Davies
• Tinucherian

Interface administrator changes

Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, administrator elections were permanently authorized on a five-month schedule. The next election will be scheduled soon; see Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections for more information. This is an alternate process to the RfA process and does not replace the latter.
• An RfC was closed with consensus to allow editors to opt-out of seeing "sticky decorative elements". Such elements should now be wrapped in {{sticky decoration wrapper}}. Editors who wish to opt out can follow the instructions at WP:STICKYDECO.
• An RfC has resulted in a broad prohibition on the use of AI-generated images in articles. A few common-sense exceptions are recognized.

Miscellaneous

• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles in the new pages feed. Sign up here to participate!

Hello!

I was wondering why you reverted all the work done to update the page? You cite copyright infringement on https://www.publicnow.com/view/F7B0F34400E8B989797A3EB4247ED7201A3EFFF1 but that is from our department. Also, I cited all the information with direct link to our website. Can you please undo these changes as we are trying to update our stats, programs, and leadership for public information. MDOC PIO (talk) 15:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I have some bad news for you.

The site is identified as being subject to full copyright so you cannot simply copy the contents.

Now that you've identified your associated with them, there is an additional problem related to conflict of interest.

Please read : Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest

I think the best solution is not to edit articles where you have a conflict of interest but the guideline does tell you what you need to do if that's what you really want to do. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the speedy reply. When you say site, are you referencing the Michigan Department of Corrections website? I read through the article mentioned and was looking for advice as the best way forward to update metrics and programs and leadership. We interact daily with the public and much of their information is sourced from wiki, some of which is over a decade old. What would be the most efficient way of updating the page with the information that was undone? Would I need to wait until a wiki contributor picks up that discussion on the talk page? Thank you in advanced. MDOC PIO (talk) 15:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I used to be active in the COI area years ago but I have limited my recent activity to copyright issues. I don't feel comfortable giving you advice on how to navigate the COI challenge but There is a forum where experience editors help new editors:

Wikipedia:Teahouse S Philbrick(Talk) 16:30, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 68, March–April 2025

In this issue we highlight two resource renewals, #EveryBookItsReader, a note about Phabricator, and, as always, a roundup of news and community items related to libraries and digital knowledge.

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to stop by and thank you for your kind, and in-depth, words at the recent ANI. Greatly appreciated. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:29, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the efforts of those of us trying to deal with copyright issues often underappreciated. While understanding the knee-jerk reactions of new editors when they view their hard work being blown away, I'm a little less charitable when it comes to someone who should know better. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:55, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you for all your efforts on the project. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:00, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sphilbrick, thanks for your help with this article. If I understand correctly, your judgment is that my copy additions were too close to the source. I did intentionally add the copy in my own terms, I think you'll find the information is not a copy paste. Please let me know what your specific issues are since I already contributed the information in a hand-crafted way. I worked 15 minutes on that edit and now don't have a way to modify it or see it after you reversions. I don't want to waste another quarter hour on it only to have it undone again, so if you are able to restore the previous version and info on improving the copy to avoid your concerns, I'll happily address the issues you raise. john factorial (talk) 19:28, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not uncommon for people to be under the misunderstanding that taking a section of text and making a few changes to it eliminates the copyright problem.

The tool used to check for copyright issues identified an 81% overall similarity which is quite high.

I also did some spot checks and found long passages that are word for word.

Please read Wikipedia:Close_paraphrasing and let me know if you wish to discuss this further.

In my opinion this was not a close call. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:42, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info and your contributions to Wikipedia. john factorial (talk) 14:02, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Subsequent to my response to you I was visiting another forum. The question of close paraphrasing came up, including the link I shared with you but someone noted a particular section of that page has advice.

This is very similar to advice I've given to other new editors.

WP:FIXCLOSEPARA S Philbrick(Talk) 14:59, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red | June 2025, Vol 11, Issue 6, Nos. 326, 327, 339, 340 Online events: New: LGBTQ+ | Alphabet run K & L Continuing, year-long initiatives: #1day1woman | Music Announcements: Who are the most overlooked and interesting Women in Red? We've no idea, but we're putting together our list of the 100 most interesting ex-Women in Red. We are creating the list to celebrate 10 years of Women in Red and we hope to present it at Wikimania. We are ignoring the obvious, so do you have a name or subject we should consider? Can you suggest a DYK style hook? If you are shy about editing that page, you are welcome to add ideas and comments on the talk page. The World Destubathon, 16 June - 13 July, 2025 Progress ("moving the needle"): Statistics available via Humaniki tool. Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 1,492 articles during this period! 19 May 2025: 20.114% of EN-WP biographies are about women (2,066,280; 415,618 women) 21 Apr 2025: 20.090% (2,061,363 bios; 414,126 women) Tip of the month: Every language Wikipedia has its own policies regarding notability and reliable sources. Before translating an article from one language Wikipedia into English Wikipedia, research the subject and verify that the translated article will meet English Wikipedia's policy requirements. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Lajmmoore (talk 06:06, 29 May 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Hello. You're invited to participate in The World Destubathon. We're aiming to destub a lot of articles and also improve longer stale articles. It will be held from Monday June 16 - Sunday July 13. There is $3338 going into it, with $500 the top prize. If you are interested in winning some vouchers to help you buy books for future content, or just see it as a good editathon opportunity to see a lot of articles improved, sign up if interested! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:51, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

can i undo and rewrite the little that was copied from a page thank you i will be waiting for your acceptenceSha19999 (talk) 12:48, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can't undo it but you are free to write text in your own words.--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:51, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i cant you have to let me undo and rewrite it took me half a day or you could do it Sha19999 (talk) 12:53, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I temporarily removed the revision deletion so you can check to see if anything can be salvaged that is not a copyright violation. Please let me know when you are down so I can restore it. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:15, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Sha19999 (talk) 15:34, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s done thank you Sha19999 (talk) 12:31, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2025).

Administrator changes

• DDima
• Gimmetrow
• Huon
• Johan Elisson
• Spangineer
• The Land

Interface administrator changes

0xDeadbeef

CheckUser changes

L235

Oversight changes

L235

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to determine whether the English Wikipedia community should adopt a position on AI development by the WMF and its affiliates.

Technical news

• A new feature called Multiblocks will be deployed on English Wikipedia on the week of June 2. See the relevant announcement on the administrators' noticeboard.
• History merges performed using the mergehistory special page are now logged at both the source and destination, rather than just the source as previously, after this RFC and the resolution of T118132.

Arbitration

• An arbitration case named Indian military history has been opened. Evidence submissions for this case close on 8 June.

Miscellaneous

• Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 17 June 2025. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!
• An Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in June 2025, with over 1,600 drafts awaiting review from the past two months. In addition to AfC participants, all administrators and new page patrollers can help review using the Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!
• The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in June 2025 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!