Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Leonard McCoy have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.
ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put ((My sandbox)) on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.
Please remember to:
Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes~~~~ at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp.
Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!
Replaceable fair use File:Carole Baskin March 2021.png[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Carole Baskin March 2021.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text ((Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>))below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 11:49, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just reverted your removal of the "better source needed" citation tag from the discussion of the new Theroux documentary on the Joe Exotic page. Your text summary contains details about the documentary's content and the release date, both of which are absent from the citation, which is a link to the documentary itself with a very brief and uninformative summary. The issue is the core Wikipedia tenet of no original research: Wikipedia is supposed to be a tertiary source based on secondary published sources. What you saw when you watched the documentary and the day you first watched it constitute original research. The article needs a published secondary source meeting WP:RS that states these facts. The need for reliable secondary sources is particularly acute here because the article is subject to WP:BLP. Carguychris (talk) 14:43, 8 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for the reply. I apologise for getting the date of the doc wrong in my edits. The date I watched it was the 5th April, but it aired the previous day. I shall only use secondary and reliable sources.HighlyLogicalVulcan 14:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Plot descriptions cannot be copied from other sources, including official sources and IMDb, unless these can be verified to be public domain or licensed compatibly with Wikipedia. They must be written in original language to comply with Wikipedia's copyright policy. On The Trump Show. — Diannaa (talk) 22:48, 18 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Speedy deletion nomination of Tiger King: The Official Tell-All Memoir[edit]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Tiger King: The Official Tell-All Memoir, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:38, 25 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi HighlyLogicalVulcan. I saw that you put a meme category on Michael Stevens (educator). I don't think that is correct. The meme categories are mostly for articles about specific memes. I guess it might be OK to put them on articles about people who are primarily known for being in very prominent and sustained memes but it is important to remember that people are not themselves memes and we should certainly not put those categories on articles about people who just happen to be in a meme but are mostly known for other things. In Michael Stevens' case, the article does not even mention memes, so I think that one is definitely wrong. --DanielRigal (talk) 17:52, 11 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi. I agree with your points since he is best known for his informative educational videos. I won't add meme categories to pages like that, which don't mention memes in the articles themselves.--HighlyLogicalVulcan (talk) 01:06, 13 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello HighlyLogicalVulcan. What is your relationship with the account NoTribbleAtAll (talk·contribs)? It appears that you may be using multiple accounts to edit the same articles—doing this is actually against Wikipedia policy, especially if the relationship between the accounts is not disclosed. This is because it splits your editing history and makes it more difficult for other editors to scrutinize your editing record. If you are using multiple accounts, please choose one account to edit and stick to that account for all your editing. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 04:27, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will from this point onwards, but had to use this one briefly as I forgot the password for NoTribbleAtAll. i have remembered it since, so this will be the final edit I make on this account. --HighlyLogicalVulcan (talk) 14:02, 18 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Late reply but I lost access to that account completely, so will be using this one instead. --HighlyLogicalVulcan (talk) 21:59, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Rick Kirkham.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
Go to the file description page and add the text ((Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>))below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 13:35, 17 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution[edit]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from British government response to the COVID-19 pandemic into Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted ((copied)) template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 21:16, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
A community discussion has authorised the use of general sanctions for pages related to Michael Jackson. The specific details of these sanctions are described here.
Broadly, general sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after he or she has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. This notification is meant to inform you that sanctions are authorised in these topic areas, which you have been editing. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution (second request)[edit]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Michael Jackson into List of Michael Jackson records and achievements. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted ((copied)) template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 16:55, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Now you've copied content from Bill Cosby to Bill Cosby sexual assault cases and vice versa, without attribution. You have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself, and so that the actual authors get credit. It's also required under the terms of the license. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. Please let me know if you don't understand what we have to do or why we have to do it. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 22:11, 24 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I understand why we have to give attribution, and I apologise for not doing so in these two instances. I will be sure, when copying content from one page to another, to give attribution in the edit summary. --HighlyLogicalVulcan (talk) 22:43, 24 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please include an edit summary for your edits. This helps others to understand what changes you made and why. This is even more important on high-profile pages such as Rishi Sunak... this edit added over 10,000 bytes but you gave no information about what it contained. Expecting others to look through diffs of this size is unhelpful. EddieHugh (talk) 18:48, 23 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello HighlyLogicalVulcan! Your additions to Rishi Sunak have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 21:35, 24 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, I understand why we have to give attribution, and I apologise for not doing so in these two instances. I will be sure, when copying content from one page to another, to give attribution in the edit summary. --HighlyLogicalVulcan (talk) 22:43, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi HighlyLogicalVulcan, I just wanted to make sure you understand that attribution isn't the problem here. While when adding information you need to add citations, in the article, to where it came from (see wp:v) the issue here is copyright. You must own the copyright to the content you add. This means You cannot copy and paste from copyrighted websites (most on the net) even if you give attribution (see WP:COMPLIC). This means that almost all the text you write on Wikipedia should be you own words based on the information from sources. As said above if you continue to copy and paste copyrighted text you are likely to be blocked. Good look with future editing Cakelot1 (talk) 07:37, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No worries, I understand that too. So I won't copy content from copyrighted websites in any further edits. --HighlyLogicalVulcan (talk) 12:33, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In case you weren't aware, the 'engine' that converts our source text into the finished wikipedia article removes excess spaces. So, if the source has redundant spaces (as I have done here), they get discarded in the public version. So you don't need to spend time correcting them. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:17, 27 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
