Jump to content

User talk: Diannaa

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


There are currently 16 open reports at CopyPatrol. PurgeThere are currently 16 open reports at CopyPatrol. Purge

 Skip to the bottom  ⇩  ·

Talk page archive
Send me no flowers
List

Don't want to lose a fine editor

[edit]

Diannaa, I know that you have collaborated with our friend Obenritter on some articles. He's feeling discouraged, as indicated by a message he's put at the top of his talk page, that he "may step back from Wikipedia, perhaps permanently." I and a couple of other editors have expressed our feelings there that WP needs editors like him. I was wondering if you could drop by and offer some moral support. It would be a tragedy to lose such a distinguished editor who has contributed so much to this great project. Carlstak (talk) 00:41, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aplysia gilchristi

[edit]

Your assertion that Aplysia gilchristi contains content copied from the Wikipedia page at Aplysia extraordinaria is wrong. These two species are different. I copied this text (which is in the public domain) from the original description by Bergh, 1907. I only gave it some improvements and a more concise vocabulary and added a picture. I hope this settles this small dispute. JoJan (talk) 13:33, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the mistake. In the future, when copying from public domain sources, please include the template {{source-attribution}} (or {{PD-notice}}, which redirects there). {Source-attribution} is preferred, because it will place the article in a category and is visible to Earwig's tool, which will alert users that the material is public domain and is okay to copy. Thanks. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:44, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Aplysia gilchristi has a PD template. But Aplysia hooveri does not. The matching content is in the lead paragraph.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:50, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CopyPatrol has stopped

[edit]
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T406574
Resolved

I have opened a ticket. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:55, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:20, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

[edit]
CREditzWiki (Talk to me!!) 00:00, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! 16 years.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:13, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:30, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:02, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:30, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism at Anhedonia

[edit]

Special:Diff/1315740632 (reverted) was copied entirely from the Results section of this source. There may be other copyvios in this article or in the edits of new user, User talk:Weak-Efficiency5607, who has been warned.

Please check. As always, thanks for your work. Zefr (talk) 17:33, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The source article is released under a compatible Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Another patroller had already added the required attribution template and discussed it with the editor, so there was no need for you to have removed the copied content. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:30, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's the technical issue of the CCA 4.0 IL and the behavioral issue of word-for-word plagiarism, right? I felt it was appropriate to alert the editor that copying text, without trying to rethink or restate the message, is not good editing. Zefr (talk) 19:43, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay to copy compatibly licensed material; even copying it word for word is okay to do, as long as you give the required attribution. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:48, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Long quotes redux

[edit]

We've talked in the past about long quotes. I'm started a conversation with an editor about a 152 word quotation. The editor posted a response on the draft article talk page. Draft_talk:Protest_paradigm Would you be willing to weigh in? On the one hand, the editor makes the interesting point (probably with help from an LLM?) that the quote in question addresses all five primary characteristics of the protest paradigm, which makes it intriguing support for the draft article, but one could argue that it makes the Boston Globe article a great source to support the paradigm but doesn't necessarily mean the full long quote should be incorporated as a quote. What say you? S Philbrick(Talk) 14:24, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The draft is 25% quotes by word count; that's too much. I have commented at Draft talk:Protest paradigm. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:45, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank-you. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:42, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

hello Diannaa, While I did't summary and own work apologize for any copyright content should not happen again, please know that honesty use page without asking advice rest was done on my own work. Stride BRT Seattle I notes that it was removed from copyright© Myanmar and Laos sorry any inconvenience that cause Regards 102.223.58.5 (talk) 14:31, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Rosenblatt - possible copyvio

[edit]

Hi Diannaa. I wondered if you had time to look at Johnny Rosenblatt. The text in the article dates to this 2012 revision, and is not well-sourced. It is very close to text at The Douglas County Historical Society, which gives a list of sources, not including Wikipedia. There is no date on the text, however, so I am unsure whether this is backwards copying from Wikipedia. Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 12:48, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it is a backwards copy.
  1. The wording of the original addition is an even closer match to the source
  2. An unsourced massive addition, added all at once
I think it needs to come out, but if we do that, the article will be reduced to a stub. I am listing at WP:CP which means any interested editors will have a chance to do a re-write before the article is subbified. Thanks for the report.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:32, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. I usually rely on archived copies to try to establish which text came first, but there wasn't one in this case. Tacyarg (talk) 17:05, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's some at the Wayback Machine, but the oldest one is from 2019. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:43, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parthenon

[edit]

Dianna, could you please have a look if there are copyright right violations in NoontideDemon' recent edit [1] in the article Parthenon?

For details see here Talk:Parthenon#Fair_wiki,_sad_relic!.A.Cython (talk) 19:42, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't have access to the source books. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:57, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you.A.Cython (talk) 23:13, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Colm Kiernan

[edit]

Hi Diannaa - do you have time to look at Colm Kiernan? Specifically the included poem; I'm wondering if it is a copyvio. Thank you. Tacyarg (talk) 08:26, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Short quotations are allowed. The poem is properly attributed and is fairly short so I don't feel like it's excessive non-free content either. Note the interesting connection to the Kennedy family.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:53, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

[edit]
Thank you!— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:57, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wishing Diannaa a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 11:40, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:57, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guide to temporary accounts

[edit]

Hello, Diannaa. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.

Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.

How do temporary accounts work?

Editing from a temporary account
  • When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern: ~2025-12345-67 (a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5).
  • All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
  • A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
  • As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
    • There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
    • There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.

Temporary account IP viewer user right

How to enable IP Reveal

Impact for administrators

  • It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
  • It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
  • Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).

Rules about IP information disclosure

  • Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
  • Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67)
  • See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.

Useful tools for patrollers

  • It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options → Tick Enable the user info card
    • This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
  • Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
  • Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
  • The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.

Videos

  • How to use Special:IPContributions
  • How automatic IP reveal works
  • How to use IP Info
  • How to use User Info

Further information and discussion

Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

William Kelly (artist)

[edit]

Hi Diannaa, you removed from William Kelly (artist) a list of the names of artists and writers—contributors to the book Art and Humanist Ideals: Contemporary Persepectives— which you say is "copyright content copied from https://books.google.ca/books/about/Art_and_Humanist_Ideals.html?id=VXxrn62oqAAC&redir_esc=y" That may be the case, but it's an edited blurb from the book in fact (I have a copy) that Google books have themselves copied, and which I did not use...how can Google Books claim copyright over something they have copied?

I'd like to restore the list of contributors please. I'll keep it to just the names, and use quotation marks and cite the page of Kelly's book on which they appear. I sincerely hope Google has no copyright over these people's names, but it wouldn't surprise me.

The "citation that appears to be about something else altogether" as you say, by Schwartzott, in fact cites Art and Humanist Ideals: Contemporary Persepectives in an essay titled "Healing the Pain of War through Art" because Kelly's book is about art as a means of settling or resolving conflict.


Jamesmcardle (talk) 22:41, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The blurb from the book also enjoys copyright protection. The blurb is also present in multiple places online, including Google. This is quite common.
People's names are obviously not copyright, especially within a simple list with no creative expression. (Lists such as Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Artists of All Time do enjoy copyright protection, because the ranking is subjective and unique.)
The surrounding prose was the problem. The current version is okay, because you have now eliminated phrases with a creative element ("early seminal texts", "art historian Herbert Read as a foundation", etc). — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:42, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Will watch carefully for such issues. Jamesmcardle (talk) 05:07, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

material you deleted to pigeon keeping not copyrighted.

[edit]

Pigeon keeping

material you deleted to pigeon keeping not copyrighted.  If you look at the website pigeoncote.com from where this information came from it is in the public domain. The main page even has the C0 icon. But even without that, the material is only a synopsis of what is there. On one hand items are deleted because an editor feels it copies to much, while others edit out because the material is too much of the own work without proper reference. A catch 22 indeed. Small wonder many would be providers of information are discouraged from contributing to our collective information base, and contributing to in other ways as well. I am leaving this comment on your talk page and hope your undo your removal. If not lets talk about it some more.

JohnVerburg (talk) 16:59, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the mistake. I have restored the content. I would not have missed this if the website had the license on all pages, not just the main page. In the future, please add attribution when copying from public domain sources: simply add the template {{source-attribution}} after your citation. I have done so for the above article. Please do this in the future so that our readers will be aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself, and that it's okay to copy verbatim. It will also help prevent patrollers from making this particular kind of mistake. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:22, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for both. I will add the code in the future. I do not really understand the difference with the ref tag, but if it helps others that is what counts and will certainly do so when in doubt.
JohnVerburg (talk) 19:42, 1 November 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Thanks again. I went and looked at how you set the tag within, but at the end of the ref tags. That will be easy to do. JohnVerburg (talk) 19:48, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Dear Diannaa, I started to make a translation of the French language article about the ANFR at https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agence_nationale_des_fr%C3%A9quences, but discovered that the ANFR has an English language website, which is more up-to-date than the Wikipedia French language page about the agency, so I paraphrased text from the website instead.

I have written to ANFR to ask permission to use the text at the ANFR website (https://www.anfr.fr/en/about-the-anfr/about-anfr and https://www.anfr.fr/en/about-the-anfr/organisation/departments-and-services as the starting point for an English language Wikipedia article about ANFR. I have also offered to submit the draft to ANFR for approval before submission. GoneDutch (talk) 14:48, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Diannaa&oldid=1320066546"