User talk:Jerodlycett/2016/September

Copyright problem: Idea of Progress

Hi Jerodlycett. Could you explain in more detail the rationale for the copyvio notice you added to Idea of Progress? I don't see any common text between the portion of the article text you bracketed with the copyvio and the youtube video you cited. Did you cite this video by mistake? Or did you mean to bracket a different portion of the article text? Or is the objection to the blockquoted material from The Myth of Modernity? I don't know how to respond to the notice because I don't understand the motivation for it. ~ Peter1c (talk) 21:56, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter1c: If you look on there you'll see a link to Copyvio Detector the highlighted bit that you copied from it is what I'm marking. Jerod Lycett (talk) 22:19, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jerodlycett. The text highlighted by the copyvio detector is (1) not the text that you bracketed with the copyvio template, and (2) not the text that I added. ~ Peter1c (talk) 00:43, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jerodlycett. I just looked at this again. The text flagged by the copyvio detector was in a revision dated March 28, 2015 and the YouTube video is dated August 7, 2016. So I don't think there's any copyright issue here. If I don't hear otherwise from you, I will go ahead and remove the template. ~ Peter1c (talk) 22:58, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to raise this concern: the template placed on my talk page stipulates that a copyright violation is a "serious concern," but my impression is that the claim was made without the scrupulous checking that such a serious concern demands. I understand that Wikipedia administrators process large numbers of articles and changes, but for a serious allegation like copyvio, I am surprised the plausibility of the allegation was not double-checked before making the allegation. Even a quick reading of the text flagged by the copyvio detector and the text bracketed by the template would have shown there is no overlap. I am concerned about the discrepancy between the seriousness of the matter and the level of attention given to it. ~ Peter1c (talk) 23:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an admin. Jerod Lycett (talk) 00:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Still, I am surprised by the carelessness with which the copvio template was added. No comment on this? ~ Peter1c (talk) 15:03, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Jaguar (microarchitecture)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jaguar (microarchitecture). Legobot (talk) 04:25, 4 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:1

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:1. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Diesel engine

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Diesel engine. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sex and Love Tour, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stand by Me. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:07, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:SIG MCX

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:SIG MCX. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

September 2016

September 2016[edit] Information icon Hello, I'm Jerodlycett. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Neville Gruzman have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Jerod Lycett (talk) 04:25, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

--Tony Rodi (talk) 06:07, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jerod Lycett. The link to my User page ( https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Tony_Rodi ) was deliberate and, I thought, appropriate. Neville Gruzman, now deceased, belatedly joined the Save East Circular Quay Committee as result of the controversy over the development of East Circular Quay being initiated by myself and my now deceased associate Paul Johnson. A citation was required and provided. Thank you for your interest and email. Numerous articles on https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Bennelong_Apartments, in the Australian Press were published during the most controversial urban development in the history of New South Wales, and for that matter, Australia. The nature of controversy is almost always contentious. I'm curious as to why my edits on the matter have been reverted on several occasions. Is it possible to reinstate these at your discretion, and if not, could you kindly explain why not? Also, on a google search under my name my user page, "User:Tony Rodi", or just simply "Tony Rodi" does not show up in the search results. What would be the reason for this? I'm am only trying to be informative regarding any of the content of my user page, since the topics are likely to be the most researched urban developments in Australia. Can you assist? I would like to upload useful historical images and newspaper articles which I could more easily email to you, for you to assist in uploading at your discretion.

Your Sincerely Tony Rodi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony Rodi (talk • contribs) 04:21, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Rodi Hi, first, the reason your User: page is not listed is because Wikipedia tells the search engines not to. Those pages don't have to be verified and have basically the requirement to not be illegal. As to why the parts are removed. Wikipedia has some requirements, anything in it must be verifiable, neutral, and can't be original research. The neutral is pretty easy to understand, but the verifiable and not original research are likely confusing to people. These refer to basically how reliable the source is. Wikipedia requires sources to be reliable sources. Wikipedia is not considered to be a reliable resource, and self-published sources (such as a blog, an autobiography, or a tweet) are not either. Self-Published Sources is something you may want to read. You're making claims about third parties, and even the claims you're making for yourself would be exceptional. If you can find news sources backing up your claims they'd be acceptable, but it'll be heavily scrutinized as it's a conflict of interest. That's not to say it won't be accepted.

For the images you want to upload, do you have copyright clearance to post them (such as being the photographer, or the photos being in public domain)? If you don't, then they won't be accepted on Wikipedia, per their policy. You just plain won't be allowed to upload the articles. However you could use the old articles for citations. After I finish posting this I'm going to drop links to the Wikipedia Adventure and Teahouse on your talk page for you. Once you're done with the Adventure please come back here with any questions, or feel free to ask on the Teahouse. I'd be happy to help you out on here with getting the information you want written up. Jerod Lycett (talk) 17:10, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Tony Rodi (talk) 23:39, 27 September 2016 (UTC)) Hi Jerod Lycett Thank You for your prompt response. The images I wish to upload include my own Architectural renderings which will be mostly available on a search for Tony Rodi Architect Images, so there should be no problem with copyright. Context and location will have to be carefully considered and composed. Can they be included on my user page? E.G. http://www.tonyrodi.com/MyImages/Gateway-2.gif " Majestic Gateway to Sydney" Sydney Morning Herald Paola Totaro 1997. This may take some time, so I will be in touch when I'm clear on the content I wish to include. Sincerely Tony Rodi[reply]

Please comment on Category talk:Violence against men

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Category talk:Violence against men. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]