User talk:Indosociology111

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; however, please remember the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Secularism in India, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless that text is available under a suitable free license. It is almost never okay to copy extensive text out of a book or website and paste it into a Wikipedia article with little or no alteration, though you can clearly and briefly quote copyrighted text in the right circumstances. Content that does not comply with this legal rule must be removed. For more information on this, see:

If you still have questions, there is the Teahouse, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page and someone will be along to answer it shortly. As you get started, you may find the pages below to be helpful.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! — Diannaa (talk) 17:17, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Diannaa.

I am familiar with the rules of wikipedia. Could you point out which specific edits of mine have used copyrighted content? I only recall directly quoting a newspaper (The Hindu), and reorganizing various sections along with correcting grammatical errors. Indosociology111 (talk) 07:44, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not the edit that @Diannaa was referring to, given the timing, but in this edit you copied content from other Wikipedia articles without giving attribution. Please follow the instructions at WP:CWW to correctly attribute the content that you added for copyright purposes. You also made a hash of the references, as both articles contained named references with the same names. I've fixed it in Persecution of Hindus but if you want to copy content from one article to another again please always check and fix the references before saving your edit. Thanks! Wham2001 (talk) 17:54, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Diannaa here. There wre no quotation marks around the content that I removed. It was straight copying, not a quote. — Diannaa (talk) 22:53, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa OK, I added it back with lots of editing now, and added quotation marks around one of the things I directly lifted. Indosociology111 (talk) 20:02, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok from a copyright point of view. Add your citation please. — Diannaa (talk) 23:17, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with... For some reason, I cannot see the diffs I made on the page Secularism in India for multiple edits. If you can tell me why, that would be great. I also would like to know which "copyrighted content" I've quoted as @Diannaa says, because I'd edited quite a bit of the text, and only inserted parts of it, but can no longer verify that because I cannot see the diffs or history of my edits. Indosociology111 (talk) 07:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Morning, and welcome to the site. You cannot see the content of the diffs as they have been Revision Deleted from the page history due to containing content from, or substantually similar to, [1]. It looks like it was something added to the "views" section originally.

An admin can see the contents of those diffs still, however due to it containing content from the above link, they are unlikely to provide this to you. You can still see the overall diff after the revdel here. Mdann52 (talk) 09:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There have been multiple diffs that have been made invisible to me, not just the one pertaining to the views section. Some explanation for those would be appreciated. @Mdann52

If I need to move this elsewhere, let me know, however my request has not been answered in full. Indosociology111 (talk) 09:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see the diffs, Diannaa may well come here to comment when they are next online. {{admin-help}} may be more appropriate, or posting on WP:AN if you disagree with the revdel. Mdann52 (talk) 09:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Indosociology111 (talk) 09:37, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, In order to completely remove the copyright material from the page history, all the intervening edits have to be hidden, from the time of insertion of the copyright material to its removal. This means that in many instances, harmless edits have to be hidden. — Diannaa (talk) 23:02, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa OK thank you. Indosociology111 (talk) 07:50, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question for administrator

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

For some reason, I cannot see the diffs I made on the page Secularism in India for multiple edits. If you can tell me why, that would be great. I also would like to know which "copyrighted content" I've quoted as @Diannaa says, because I'd edited quite a bit of the text, and only inserted parts of it, but can no longer verify that because I cannot see the diffs or history of my edits.

And as I say above, it's not just the Views section, but the others that had nothing to do with that for which I can no longer see the diffs. --Indosociology111 (talk) 09:40, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Content you added matches an article in The Hindu. I'm not going to reproduce it here, because it's copyright. I will send you the copied material via email. — Diannaa (talk) 12:44, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was not a quotation; there were no quotation marks; it was presented as though you had written the paragraph yourself. That's a violation of our copyright policy. — Diannaa (talk) 12:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Additionally, you must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days, and are not allowed to make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on a page within this topic.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

_signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:48, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosguill What is "non-ECP" editor? Indosociology111 (talk) 20:06, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing you meant "extended confirmed", never mind. Indosociology111 (talk) 20:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's a reference to Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Procedures#Extended_confirmed_restriction. ECP is technically slightly incorrect on reflection, as that refers to extended-confirmed protection, which applies to pages rather than editors. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't have participated in it if I'd known it needed ECR. I'd just needed Auto-confirmed on some pages so far. @Rosguill Indosociology111 (talk) 20:20, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]