User talk:Dare2Leap

en:Wikipedia:Civility

User page

Talk page

Contributions

More info

Awards

Monitoring

Portal

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #256

This user tries to do the right thing. If they make a mistake, please let them know. This user is sorry for things he has done in the past on Wikipedia, and is determined to make things right. EW+ This user has experienced no personal attacks . does not understand mean people . Please be nice. This user reserves the right to completely screw up his own edits.

Hello, welcome to my talk page! I'm up for civil, important and meaningful discussions (vandal, copyright, revert, etc.). Make sure the section title has your reason in it (for example: your reason is copyright infringement, so the section title should be "Copyright infringement [insert whatever]"). Please be neutral, assume good faith, civil, no personal attacks.

Hello, Akmaie Ajam! talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 15:50, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply ] Getting Started Contributing to Wikipedia Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: make requests Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Reliable sources Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost) Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs Talk pages User scripts

Help: 1. About user pages 10. User permission

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:40, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Regarding this edit, the reason the article used per cent was because it's written in British English, and that's the more standard usage there. It's not a big enough deal for it to be worth it for me to change it back (percent isn't strictly wrong in British English), but if someone else does, just wanted to let you know that you should leave it be. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:51, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but please keep in mind I only have basic understanding of British English. Sorry for you, and thank you for reminding me.

talk) 08:41, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Your addition to OnePlus Nord 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. Hut 8.5 18:09, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to avoid copyright violations then don't copy text verbatim from external sources. Almost all information on the internet is copyrighted and you shouldn't copy text from anywhere into Wikipedia unless you are certain that the text is in the public domain or is made available under a compatible licence. If in any doubt you should assume the material is copyrighted - copyright exists automatically unless someone explicitly disclaims it. Instead you should write text in your own words instead of copying it from somewhere else. Wikipedia takes copyright seriously and violating copyright is illegal in almost every country in the world. It is also against Wikipedia policies (Wikipedia:Copyrights, Wikipedia:Copyright violations) and editors who persistently post copyright violations can be blocked from editing (see the blocking policy).

For example you copied several paragraphs verbatim from here. News outlets like that are almost guaranteed to be copyrighted, and the terms and conditions for that site confirms this (The copyright in the material contained on, in, or available through this Website or any other Future Site or Server ... is owned by or licensed to Future or its group companies. All rights are reserved. You do not have any right, interest or title in or to the Material unless otherwise expressly indicated.) The absence of a notice like this doesn't mean that text isn't copyrighted because copyright exists automatically unless it expires or is explicitly disclaimed. Hut 8.5 07:02, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for unknowingly copypasting copyrighted sources. I have edited the OnePlus Nord article to the point before copyright deletion, and the edit was made with copyright in mind. (written by me). The lessons you've given to me can be invaluable. Thank you for notifying me with copyright.

talk) 07:42, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:

• Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
• Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
• Take particular care while adding biographical material about a
  reliable sources
  .
• No
  abuse of multiple accounts
  .
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
• Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
• Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The

You seem to have copied other editors' work, without attribution, and without even making sure that the references worked properly. Please do not do this. Please look at the state of the article as you left it, and consider the poor reader who wants to learn about this locomotive (not "a train"). It's useless, because you added the references without realising that they were defined elsewhere. The previous editor had left a useless article in this state, but your improvements didn't really improve it. There's a lot to learn about editing Wikipedia: please go slowly and make sure that every edit you make is a real improvement to the encyclopedia and leaves an article which a reader will find helpful. Thanks. PamD 15:42, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@

(Talk) 15:53, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

See Help:Referencing for beginners perhaps, or Wikipedia:Citing sources, but don't just copy other editors' sentences and claim credit for them: see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and the template {{Copied}}. PamD 16:02, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And here you lost the detail of which station it was: in 1955 there were two stations in Bournemouth, one of which was called Central. Please take care. PamD 16:11, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@

(Talk) 16:17, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

@

(Talk) 16:33, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

I'll just add my two cents here since you have pinged me as well. Nobody is trying to attack you by bringing these issues to your attention; these warnings you have received and talk page discussions are not personal attacks. It's basically how collaboration works on Wikipedia.: whenever you see a problematic edit, you discuss/address it. This is the whole point of

here to build an encyclopedia, other editors will (mostly) assume good faith as long as you won't continue to edit in a way that's outright disruptive. I suggest you go through Wikipedia:Five pillars again. Good luck -- ChamithN (talk) 16:55, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Ok, @

(Talk) 17:11, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

@

(Talk) 06:50, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

1. An enthusiastic editor created an unsourced, inaccurate, unlinked, stub: this version. It looks from their edit history as if their main interest is really the Thomas the Tank Engine series, rather than locomotives. They got the name of the railway wrong - it should be LSWR, not NSWR (NSWR is an alternative name for New South Wales Government Railways in Australia).
2. Someone tagged it for CSD as Copvio because they found the text elsewhere. (They found it in an Amazon rview, but that writer was quoting from a website, probably this fandom site.)
3. You wanted to help, so added a few sentences copied from an existing article, complete with the references as they appeared in those sentences, resulting in something useless for the reader because those references were incomplete as they were part of a complex system of references. This was obvious if you actually looked at the article as you left it. Haresnape, Bradley and Trevena are not defined, so are inadequate as references. You should not be adding references to an article unless you have yourself checked those sources and know that they support the content. You should not be copying other editor's prose without attribution. You should not be adding references which don't help the reader because they are only part of the reference.
4. In the course of your improvements you copied a sentence which referred to a crash at Bournemouth Central Station but then changed it to "the Bournemouth railway station": not helpful, as there were two stations in the town at the time. You didn't add any links to any other articles while trying to improve this stub.
5. If you can't see that there was a problem with the article as you left it, then that itself is a problem.

This badly-written stub with no sources or wikilinks was probably not worth trying to rescue. There is more information, properly sourced, in the article on the class of locos, to which I have redirected it.

If the topic had been something notable not covered elsewhere in the encyclopedia, it might have been best to let the CSD run its course (to remove the copyvio material from our system completely) and then create a new stub, with a proper source and links, afterwards. Ah, in fact that reminds me, we ought to get those revisions removed anyway. I'll remind myself how to do that. Copyvio is a complicated area.

Does that help? Please don't be discouraged about editing, but please take care with your edits. Thanks. PamD 08:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've now added a Copyvio statement and note to the talk page, all of which would have been unncessary if this silly little unsourced copyvio stub had been left well alone to be deleted as copyvio. I know you meant well but I think your energies were wasted here. PamD 08:21, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@

(Talk) 08:49, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm still worried about your references: if you add something to an article and cite a source, it should mean "I have consulted this source and it supports this information", not "I have found this information in Wikipedia and someone else says that this source supports that information" (even if you take the trouble to cite the reference fully, unlike here). There is a big difference. If you can't find reliable sources to support the content you want to add, don't add it. And as for making something less accurate in order to avoid it looking like copyright violation... Just be more careful, please. PamD 09:44, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@

(Talk) 10:06, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

See

WP:RS. And just look at the article: the state you left it in was poor because the references just didn't make sense. The reader could not see where you got the information from (or even, where you claimed you had got the information, as you clearly hadn't consulted the sources yourself). If you don't see that, I can't help. PamD 10:10, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

@

(Talk) 10:23, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

@

(Talk) 12:36, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

@

(Talk) 12:50, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

I have spent a lot of time trying to explain clearly and helpfully what problems there were with this article. You still do not seem to understand one particular point I am making, that you should not be adding content to an article unless you have yourself seen the information in a reliable independent source. Not just in another Wikipedia article. Don't just try to add the references someone else has used, unless you have yourself seen that book or website and checked that the information is there. But when you do make any edits to an article, pause for a moment to have a look at it and see whether it makes sense, whether it has useful wikilinks to other articles, whether the references are adequate for the reader to be able to see where the information has come from and follow it up if they want to, and so on.

In this case you were working on a stub which was already unsourced, unlinked and (though you didn't know it) inaccurate (NSWR v. LSWR). You complicated matters by using "train" where "locomotive" or "engine" would be correct. (A train is engine plus coaches: Sir Gillemere is a locomotive or engine). If you aren't familiar with a subject area you need to be even more careful than usual about getting the wording right. Linking some terms such as

List of Thomas & Friends railway engines

).

If an article is nominated for speedy deletion as copyright violation it is probably best to leave it alone so that it can be deleted and its copyright violation removed from public view in the encyclopedia, ini a simple process. It would then be possible to create a new, legal, article, by finding reliable sources (not a wikipedia article) and using the information you find there, in your own words, but taking care not to accidentally lose information (like that it was Bournemouth Central station) in your eagerness to avoid using the exact wording. Or there could be a redirect to an article in which the information is already available. I really don't see what else there is for me to explain to you.

I'm sorry if you find this discussion is making you sad. Cheer up: it's only Wikipedia. PamD 14:29, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I found the little bit of info about "Merlin" quite entertaining, when I read that it really was connected with the three stovepipe chimney modification, and have added it, with a source, to the article on the class of engines. Although the source I cite is not particularly reliable, being a fandom site, I think it is strong enough to support the statement "It is reported that ...", and I've quoted the relevant statement. PamD 14:47, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@

(Talk) 15:08, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

OK,one last post (up to now it's been you, not me, who has insisted on continuing the conversation): if you can't find good sources online, sometimes it's best just to leave it to the people who have sources. Obviously some editors have a shelf-full of relevant books, like the authors of

Sir Gillemere, so it should have been allowed to be speedily deleted. Concentrate on working on articles where you can make a useful contribution using reliable sources, and in areas where you understand the terminology. Happy Editing. PamD 15:24, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

@

(Talk) 12:33, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

I can't give you a definitive percentage level as that will change depending on both how much text was copied, and the total size of the article. I also can't see where a copyvio on

2020 Belarusian protests was removed, so I can't comment on that. Low confidence results can come from similar phrasing, quotes, or small amounts of infringing text. High confidence results can come from other sites copying us. Earwig's tool is awesome at giving you pointers to which bit of article text matches which website, but it's a pointer in the right direction for an investigation, not a final answer. There's no hard-and-fast rule; figuring out this stuff relies entirely on analysis of the specific case at hand. stwalkerster (talk) 16:16, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

@Stwalkerster: So, does this revision of the All Indian Cine Workers Association (https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&oldid=976699616&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1) need to be deleted? I will give you information of the most infringed sites (21.3%):

https://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india/pulwama-terror-attack-one-year-40-crpf-jawans-martyred-jammu-kashmir-588721 (scroll to the bottom and you will see "All rights reserved") (couple of "All Indian Cine Workers Association" "copying", and one long, definitely copied text.)

https://www.zoomnews.in/terms-and-conditions.html (not the infringed page) (This one says that violating the copyright could result in penalties.) (couple of "All Indian Cine Workers Association" "copying", and one long, definitely copied text.)

Also, the copyvio detector for the 2020 Belarusian protests has now worked (https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&oldid=976935349&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1), with 32% for the state.gov website (turns out it's public domain) and 24.8% for the apnews.com website (this has the "All rights reserved" tag on the bottom). Please answer quickly. Thank you.

(Talk) 02:29, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

The AICWA one is a single sentence which is practically a quote anyway, so I think it's probably fine. The protests one is only returning 18% for me, and the top one is a CBS news article which again, is practically a quote, and also probably fine. stwalkerster (talk) 14:34, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@

(Talk) 15:34, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Akmaie Ajam! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 04:11, Thursday, September 24, 2020 (

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dumai, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bajaj.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this edit [1] has not solved the

Hi, @

(Talk) 21:22, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you for your answer. No worries: there's a learning curve you just have to get through 👍. JBchrch talk 21:35, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Salam Sir, Sir there is an illustration of Holy Prophet SAW in "Prohibiting Nasi" Section". I tried very hard I was unable to change or remove the picture. Please remove it Sir please.

Salam Sir, Sir there is an illustration of Holy Prophet SAW in "Prohibiting Nasi" Section". I tried very hard I was unable to change or remove the picture. Please remove it Sir please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Salman khan 01 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 I invite you to please join the discussion at Talk:Sarah Azhari.

Hello, we are seeking help with the Sarah Azhari article, created in 2013 & recently the subject of a deletion proposal. At issue was whether or not the Indonesian language sources establish notability. I am inviting you to the discussion at Talk:Sarah Azhari#Help with Indonesian language sources because you are in the Category:User id-N & have a minimum of 1,000 edits across all Wikimedia projects.

I realize that some of you are very busy while others may no longer be editing. Nevertheless, I thought it wise to consult with you.

Thank your for the work that you do on Wiki[mp]edia! Peaceray (talk) 21:06, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aa bowl of starberries for uyou! FelixAnon (talk) 22:27, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

An article that you have been involved in editing—Yüksek Hızlı Tren—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:24, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply

]