Jump to content

User talk:Sphilbrick

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

FYI:

Copyright issue?

If you are coming to open a discussion with me because I reverted an edit of yours as a copyright issue, please make sure your post includes a link to the article in question - not just the name of the article, a link. Then read the following:

I typically use an edit summary with "copyright issue re URL", or "cv URL". The URL identifies source material that matches your edit too closely.

Copy Within Wikipedia If you added material to an article which came from an existing article in Wikipedia, it is highly likely that this will be flagged as a potential copyright violation in our CopyPatrol software.

If you followed the best practices at Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia, you left an edit summary indicating the source, I will mark it as acceptable, and you are probably not reading this message. On the other hand, if you did not identify what you did in an edit summary, then I probably reverted the edit. However, the indicated source URL will not be the Wikipedia article, it will be be some site that copied from Wikipedia. (As a technical point, this is not a false positive because failing to follow best practices means that the attribution requirements have not been followed.) If the edit has been revision deleted, let me know so I can reverse it and you can provide the proper attribution. If it was not revision deleted but simply reverted, feel free to undo my revert, explaining carefully in the edit summary why you are doing so and add the proper attribution.

Other issues There are other reasons why your edit may have been reverted in error. I do a lot of reviews of flagged issues. In 1 to 2% of the cases, I do make a mistake and I'm happy to rectify it. Some sources of errors:

  • Source page which has a full copyright notice at the bottom of the page but material within the page is properly licensed. Sometimes that license is buried in the page and sometimes on a separate page.
  • Source material that is public domain but not clearly identified as such.
  • Source material that is properly licensed but I somehow failed to notice the license
In any of these cases, politely let me know and I will remedy this situation as quickly as possible.


April editathons at Women in Red

[edit]

January 2020 at Women in Red

[edit]
January 2020, Volume 6, Issue 1, Numbers 146, 148, 149, 150, 151, 153


Happy Holidays from all of us at Women in Red, and thank you for your support in 2019. We look forward to working with you in 2020!

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Chartered_Institute_for_the_Management_of_Sport_and_Physical_Activity

Thank you for flagging the copyright violation. I agree with the removal. However, there was other content that was removed that did not come from the website you flagged. This included infobox additions, a new section, and other text in the introduction not related to the vision/mission paragraphs.

I have reintroduced these elements onto the page. I will leave mission/vision absent.

COI on my profile. Happy to add elsewhere if needed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Reece_at_CIMSPA

While it may not seem like the right thing to do, it is convention, when identifying a copyright issue, to do a rollback, which sometimes picks up other copyright issues and sometimes picks up inrelated,a nd non-problematic issues. You are always welcome to restore the non-copyright issue edits.

••••🎄Merry Christmas🎄••••

[edit]

"May you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a ..Merry Christmas.. and a ..Happy New Year.., whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you ..warm greetings.. for Christmas and New Year 2021."

Happy editing,
User:245CMR

Women in Red April 2025

[edit]
Women in Red | April 2025, Vol 11, Issue 4, Nos. 326, 327, 335, 336


Online events:

Announcements (Events facilitated by others):

Tip of the month:

  • When creating biographies, don't forget to use Template:DEFAULTSORT.
    Accessible from "Wiki markup" at the foot of the page being edited,
    it allows categories to be listed under the subject's family name rather than their first or given name.

Moving the needle: (statistics available via Humaniki tool)

  • 24 Mar 2025: 20.070% of biographies on EN-WP are about women (2,057,083, 412,857 women)
  • 27 Jan 2025: 20.031% (2,047,793 bios, 410,200 women)

Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 2,657 articles during this period!

Other ways to participate:

Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 13:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2025).

Administrator changes

added
readded Dennis Brown
removed

Bureaucrat changes

added Barkeep49

CheckUser changes

added 0xDeadbeef

Oversighter changes

removed GB fan
readded Moneytrees

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Nephews of Zorro

[edit]

Hi, I see that you reverted my addition of a "Plot" section in the article The Nephews of Zorro as it is supposedly a copyright violation of this blog article from August 26, 2012. However, the plot i posted was actually a translation of the plot from the Italian Wikipedia, which has been there since September 1, 2009 and has been virtually unchanged since then. The blog must have been copied and translated from the Italian Wikipedia. 62.211.140.57 (talk) 16:14, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PLease explain this in the edit summary and that will help. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:08, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red May 2025

[edit]
Women in Red | May 2025, Vol 11, Issue 5, Nos. 326, 327, 337, 338


Online events:

Announcements (events facilitated by others):

Progress ("moving the needle"):

  • Statistics available via Humaniki tool. Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 1,269 articles during this period!
  • 21 Apr 2025: 20.090% of EN-WP biographies are about women (2,061,363; 414,126 women)
  • 24 Mar 2025: 20.070% (2,057,083 bios; 412,857 women)

Tip of the month:

  • Those of you who experience harassment while trying to create or improve articles about women
    are welcome to bring your problems to our attention on the Women in Red talk page.

Other ways to participate:

--Lajmmoore (talk 09:22, 29 April 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Paul J. Spangler page deleted.

[edit]

15:09, 21 April 2025 Sphilbrick talk contribs deleted page Paul J. Spangler (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: https://siarchives.si.edu/collections/siris_arc_217574) (thank)

SI Archives, like all US government publications, are not subject to copyright. Somebody who is a specialist in copyright infringement ought to be aware of that. Please undelete the page. Abrower (talk) 17:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Much of my Wikipedia work relates to sports articles, for which the Sports Illustrated archives are a common source. The Copypatrol tool identified the source of the material as siarchives.si.edu. I mistakenly thought it was a reference to the Sports Illustrated archives. Additionally the URL ends in .edu which is not a common identifier for the US government.
Your suggestion that someone knowledgeable about copyright ought to automatically know that the SI archives are not subject to copyright is not quite true.
Check out the terms of use. Those state that content marked with the "Creative Commons Zero icon CC0 is made available under the Creative Commons Zero (CC0) license. This Content is not protected by copyright and may be used for commercial and noncommercial purposes without fee or copyright restriction; however, the CC0 icon pertains only to the copyright status of the Content. The Smithsonian does not guarantee that all Content marked with the CC0 icon is free from rights other than copyright, including rights held by third parties, or that use of such Content might not be subject to other laws, such as rights of publicity or privacy. "
They go on to note that if the icon isn't present, then the material cannot be used "without further permission from the Smithsonian".
In other words, your blanket statement implying everything in the archives is copyright free is not correct.
Here's the page containing the content you used. I searched but have not located the icon indicating that it can be used without further permission. Do you see it?
Nevertheless my rationale for deleting was my mistaken assumption that it was Sports Illustrated content. While the lack of the icon suggests it may not be copyright free, it is clearly not unambiguous to me, so I've restored it.
It may well trigger another report in the Copypatrol tool. If you can find definitive evidence that this material is free of copyright it would be helpful to add a note to the talk page so that other reviewers will understand the status. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:01, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unwrapped Episodes - Edits Reverted

[edit]

Hi, I saw you reverted my good faith edits to the "Unwrapped" TV show page due to lack of sources. The descriptions of the episodes are from the official Food Network Unwrapped website, and I cited them at the top of the episodes section title. Please let me know if this is the right protocol for adding episode descriptions. Thank you. Eggie88 (talk) 01:24, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I am packing for a weekend trip and leaving literally in minutes. I will look into this when I returned next week to be more definitive but you stated that the descriptions came from the official website which is almost certainly subject to copyright so is not acceptable. It's a great source if you want to write the summaries in your own words and provide a reference to the official source but you can't just use their words unless they explicitly licensed them.
Send me a reminder post on Tuesday if this doesn't satisfactorily answer your question. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:25, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that!

[edit]

User talk:Materialscientist#Confused. Fortuna, Imperatrix Mundi 12:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to be sorry for.  I do a fair amount of CopyPatrol work, and many copyvios are obvious but some are tricky. It's been my experience that when an editor with a lot of edits makes an edit that triggers the CopyPatrol tool, there is a chance something's going on that's not obvious. I've made it my practice to check with the editor in such cases. I'm not disagreeing with you that it is almost certainly a copyvio, but I remain puzzled that a copyvio was reinstated by Materialscientist. However, given that it's been removed I'm going to move on. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2025).

Administrator changes

added Rusalkii
readded NaomiAmethyst (overlooked last month)
removed

Interface administrator changes

removed Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michigan Dept of Corrections

[edit]

Hello!

I was wondering why you reverted all the work done to update the page? You cite copyright infringement on https://www.publicnow.com/view/F7B0F34400E8B989797A3EB4247ED7201A3EFFF1 but that is from our department. Also, I cited all the information with direct link to our website. Can you please undo these changes as we are trying to update our stats, programs, and leadership for public information. MDOC PIO (talk) 15:11, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I have some bad news for you.
The site is identified as being subject to full copyright so you cannot simply copy the contents.
Now that you've identified your associated with them, there is an additional problem related to conflict of interest.
Please read : Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest
I think the best solution is not to edit articles where you have a conflict of interest but the guideline does tell you what you need to do if that's what you really want to do. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the speedy reply. When you say site, are you referencing the Michigan Department of Corrections website? I read through the article mentioned and was looking for advice as the best way forward to update metrics and programs and leadership. We interact daily with the public and much of their information is sourced from wiki, some of which is over a decade old. What would be the most efficient way of updating the page with the information that was undone? Would I need to wait until a wiki contributor picks up that discussion on the talk page? Thank you in advanced. MDOC PIO (talk) 15:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I used to be active in the COI area years ago but I have limited my recent activity to copyright issues. I don't feel comfortable giving you advice on how to navigate the COI challenge but There is a forum where experience editors help new editors:
Wikipedia:Teahouse S Philbrick(Talk) 16:30, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 68

[edit]
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 68, March–April 2025

In this issue we highlight two resource renewals, #EveryBookItsReader, a note about Phabricator, and, as always, a roundup of news and community items related to libraries and digital knowledge.

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:18, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

[edit]

Just wanted to stop by and thank you for your kind, and in-depth, words at the recent ANI. Greatly appreciated. Onel5969 TT me 15:29, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the efforts of those of us trying to deal with copyright issues often underappreciated. While understanding the knee-jerk reactions of new editors when they view their hard work being blown away, I'm a little less charitable when it comes to someone who should know better. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:55, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, thank you for all your efforts on the project. Onel5969 TT me 00:00, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Del the Funky Homosapien

[edit]

Hey Sphilbrick, thanks for your help with this article. If I understand correctly, your judgment is that my copy additions were too close to the source. I did intentionally add the copy in my own terms, I think you'll find the information is not a copy paste. Please let me know what your specific issues are since I already contributed the information in a hand-crafted way. I worked 15 minutes on that edit and now don't have a way to modify it or see it after you reversions. I don't want to waste another quarter hour on it only to have it undone again, so if you are able to restore the previous version and info on improving the copy to avoid your concerns, I'll happily address the issues you raise. john factorial (talk) 19:28, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not uncommon for people to be under the misunderstanding that taking a section of text and making a few changes to it eliminates the copyright problem.
The tool used to check for copyright issues identified an 81% overall similarity which is quite high.
I also did some spot checks and found long passages that are word for word.
Please read Wikipedia:Close_paraphrasing and let me know if you wish to discuss this further.
In my opinion this was not a close call. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:42, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the info and your contributions to Wikipedia. john factorial (talk) 14:02, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Subsequent to my response to you I was visiting another forum. The question of close paraphrasing came up, including the link I shared with you but someone noted a particular section of that page has advice.
This is very similar to advice I've given to other new editors.
WP:FIXCLOSEPARA S Philbrick(Talk) 14:59, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red June 2025

[edit]
Women in Red | June 2025, Vol 11, Issue 6, Nos. 326, 327, 339, 340


Online events:

Announcements:

  • Who are the most overlooked and interesting Women in Red? We've no idea,
    but we're putting together our list of the 100 most interesting ex-Women in Red.
    We are creating the list to celebrate 10 years of Women in Red and we hope to present it at Wikimania.
    We are ignoring the obvious, so do you have a name or subject we should consider?
    Can you suggest a DYK style hook?
    If you are shy about editing that page, you are welcome to add ideas and comments on the talk page.
  • The World Destubathon, 16 June - 13 July, 2025

Progress ("moving the needle"):

  • Statistics available via Humaniki tool. Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 1,492 articles during this period!
  • 19 May 2025: 20.114% of EN-WP biographies are about women (2,066,280; 415,618 women)
  • 21 Apr 2025: 20.090% (2,061,363 bios; 414,126 women)

Tip of the month:

  • Every language Wikipedia has its own policies regarding notability and reliable sources.
    Before translating an article from one language Wikipedia into English Wikipedia, research
    the subject and verify that the translated article will meet English Wikipedia's policy requirements.

Other ways to participate:

--Lajmmoore (talk 06:06, 29 May 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

The World Destubathon

[edit]

Hello. You're invited to participate in The World Destubathon. We're aiming to destub a lot of articles and also improve longer stale articles. It will be held from Monday June 16 - Sunday July 13. There is $3338 going into it, with $500 the top prize. If you are interested in winning some vouchers to help you buy books for future content, or just see it as a good editathon opportunity to see a lot of articles improved, sign up if interested! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:51, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Ottoman Zeila: Revision history

[edit]

can i undo and rewrite the little that was copied from a page thank you i will be waiting for your acceptenceSha19999 (talk) 12:48, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can't undo it but you are free to write text in your own words.--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:51, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]


i cant you have to let me undo and rewrite it took me half a day or you could do it Sha19999 (talk) 12:53, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I temporarily removed the revision deletion so you can check to see if anything can be salvaged that is not a copyright violation. Please let me know when you are down so I can restore it. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:15, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Sha19999 (talk) 15:34, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It’s done thank you Sha19999 (talk) 12:31, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2025).

Administrator changes

removed

Interface administrator changes

added 0xDeadbeef

CheckUser changes

readded L235

Oversight changes

readded L235

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to determine whether the English Wikipedia community should adopt a position on AI development by the WMF and its affiliates.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • An arbitration case named Indian military history has been opened. Evidence submissions for this case close on 8 June.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:17, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted page

[edit]

Hi i see recently you deleted page Petrit Malaj, latest changes were made (before you deleted) to not violate copyright link added was just as reference of his bio. Lanceloth345 (talk) 00:20, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

also to be noted page was reviewed with latest changes made, before you deleted. Lanceloth345 (talk) 00:25, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I realize you are relatively new but that practice is not considered an acceptable editing practice.
It is not considered acceptable to post copyrighted material and then make changes that "clean up" the copyright violation. We don't permit copyright violations in any version, which means the early versions have to be removed.
It is standard practice when removing a copyright violation to remove all consecutive edits by the same editor.
I'm sorry if you manage to clear the copyright violation but best practices are to write material in your own words and post it not try to "clean up" a copyrighted passage. It isn't even good practice to start with a copyrighted passage and edit it, but if you must do that please do that step off line before posting anything.
Feel free to try again. S Philbrick(Talk) 01:10, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for reply, i appreciate your comments, it was not my real intention to copy/paste and even to violate copyright as it's not my first created article. Am i able to try again? Lanceloth345 (talk) 01:20, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please do. S Philbrick(Talk) 10:58, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Already did it, thank you again. Lanceloth345 (talk) 15:55, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up on my edits on Wikipedia page "Veer Savarkar International Airport" - Ya-Lun, Shi

[edit]

Hello, thank you very much for trying to put me on the right track. On 29th June, I made several edits to add a "History" section on the already-existing Wikipedia page for "Veer Savarkar International Airport". Subsequently you reverted these edits because I supposedly violated the Copyrights of an article on a different website with near-identical information (http://knowindia.net/portblair_airport.html). I obviously know about this because I did copy-paste most of the content from this website; the point was to expand upon Wikipedia's article as it didn't have a "History" section which this website had. So I copied it over and did cite this website. It is not the case that I copied text and didn't cite whoever I copied from; I in fact did cite them. Please undo your reversions if you don't find fault with my edits following my explanation here or let me know how to proceed. Thank you so much!!! Ya-Lun, Shi (talk) 22:26, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Directly copying from the website is rarely a good idea.
If the site is subject to full copyright than it's both a violation of our copyright policy and possibly a violation of copyright law depending on the length and some other considerations.
Well material added to an article should be cited, I got the impression you thought citation cured the copyright problem. I'm not sure whether that was your intent but I've run into other new editors think it's okay to copy directly as long as you properly cited. That's not the case.
While there are some examples where copying a source site is acceptable, such as sites with material is in the public domain, excerpts that are sufficiently short and explicitly noted with quote blocks or quotation marks as  being quotes, that doesn't apply in this case.
I have run into situations where our copyright detection software identifies one site is the source when the actual source was a different site with identical or near identical language. That seems to be the case here but as you have admitted that you copied it, unless you can demonstrate that the alternative site is public domain it was not acceptable.
In most cases material should be written in your own words. I understand that if you're trying to write the history of the place and someone else is done that for you it's tempting to want to use their words but that's not the way Wikipedia works. S Philbrick(Talk) 23:05, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I will maybe try to paraphrase/rewrite in my own words and use synonyms? I will still give citations. Ya-Lun, Shi (talk) 23:49, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. S Philbrick(Talk) 00:02, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the "edit" button after logging in. Do you need to release some kind of control? Thanks! Ya-Lun, Shi (talk) 00:31, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have wrapped up my edits. Shouldn't be problems. Thanks and let me know if anything still needs refinement! Ya-Lun, Shi (talk) 02:18, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red July 2025

[edit]
Women in Red | July 2025, Vol 11, Issue 7, Nos. 326, 327, 341, 342, 343


Online events:

Announcements:

Progress ("moving the needle"):

  • Statistics available via Humaniki tool. Thank you if you contributed one or more of the 1,514 articles during this period!
  • 19 May 2025: 20.114% of EN-WP biographies are about women (2,066,280 bios; 415,618 women)
  • 23 Jun 2025: 20.130% (2,072,236 bios; 417,132 women)

Tip of the month:

  • A nuanced article is more useful than a shiny pedestal. Readers can find hope in your subject's survival or achievements,
    but they can also learn from your subject's mistakes and limitations.

Other ways to participate:

--Lajmmoore (talk 09:22, 30 June 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 69

[edit]
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 69, May–June 2025

In this issue we highlight a new partnership, Citation Watchlist and, as always, a roundup of news and community items related to libraries and digital knowledge.

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team – 13:10, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2025).

Administrator changes

removed NuclearWarfare

Interface administrator changes

added L235

Guideline and policy news

Miscellaneous

  • The 2025 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1 July to 30 September. Sign up now!
  • Administrator elections will take place this month. Administrator elections are an alternative to RFA that is a gentler process for candidates due to secret voting and multiple people running together. The call for candidates is July 9–15, the discussion phase is July 18–22, and the voting phase is July 23–29. Get ready to submit your candidacy, or (with their consent) to nominate a talented candidate!
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:49, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edit reversion to Draft:History of the Democratic Socialists of America: Revision history

[edit]

Hi @Sphilbrick:: This revert is an error. You linked this article: https://newlinesmag.com/reportage/the-left-wing-activists-who-want-to-change-american-politics/

I can't see the hidden edits. I believe I included 2 sentences from said article, with a reference to that article, in a section on Caucuses to be further reduced later.

Your reversion also deleted a dozen other non-copyright-affected edits. Please consider reverting back. If not feasible, please consider temporarily un-hiding those edits so I can copy out those other edits. Thank you. SocDoneLeft (talk) 02:54, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blatant and repeated copyvios by Barnabywoods

[edit]

I appreciate your gentle tone on the talk page, but I'm ready to apply their first block if they don't see sense soon. BusterD (talk) 13:17, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Part of this was feeling bad because I not seen a polite inquiry from them. Still not sure why it didn't give me a notification. I run across a lot of people who don't seem to have been taught in school anything about copyright so I like to start off politely. Totally on board with the block if the responses so far don't sink in. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:22, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

please revert edit reversion

[edit]
Hi S Philbrick, you deleted my last edit on Yu-Chen Wang with a lot of information, like about her latest installation at Tate Modern - not sure why this should be a violation of copyright?
Could you please just delete the part that seems to violate copyright policy and not all the other changes I made (shortened etc.) That would be very kind, as I haven't saved them elsewhere.

Sabine Hagmann (talk) 22:15, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your desire that fixing a copyright violation would be surgical, that is, removing exactly the problematic text and nothing more, but that's a little more difficult than you might realize. Even if that or possible it would leave an odd gap and might interrupt the flow of the article, so it is the practice when encountering a copyright violation to not just revert the edit but all consecutive edits by the same editor.
I did temporarily unhide the revision, then copied the contents of the article after your edit and emailed you the contents so you can find the text that is not subject to copyright and re-add it in proper context. S Philbrick(Talk) 23:27, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!
Unfortunately I didn't get the e-mail - would you mind sending it again or revert, so I can talk out the bit I guess you think is a copyright violation myself? Sabine Hagmann (talk) 11:42, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I resent it S Philbrick(Talk) 11:47, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
thank you again, not sure where I can find it. has not arrived on my inbox yet. Sabine Hagmann (talk) 11:51, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what to tell you. Wikipedia has a special facility so that I can send an email to you without knowing your email address. I probably used it 100 times and never had anyone say they did not receive it. If you look at the right side panel you will see "email this user". That means you have enabled the ability to receive emails through this facility. I asked it to send a copy to myself and that worked so I don't understand the problem. If you do not get it soon, you might ask at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) S Philbrick(Talk) 11:55, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kidnapping of Shahbaz Taseer

[edit]

I had added some key facts that were missing using a BBC source, which was cited. Would you mind if I will add the facts, phrased differently? Malaiya (talk)

Please do so, in your own words.S Philbrick(Talk) 19:25, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think...

[edit]

I made a boob. Talk:Hollywood Boosters still exists as I selected the message when I reported it. I wasn't sure whether to g8 it? Sorry, Knitsey (talk) 01:48, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article has now been recreated Hollywood Boosters Knitsey (talk) 01:51, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it. Thanks for reporting. S Philbrick(Talk) 01:53, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Knitsey (talk) 01:54, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We created a new page for the hollywood boosters with revised text. How come the second one got removed too? Thank you! Kazisdaman (talk) 01:59, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I created a 3rd revision, that hopefully is much more acceptable. Please let me know if we need to modify this further! Kazisdaman (talk) 02:26, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting Oxagon Article

[edit]

Thanks for your message, but why the article Oxagon is deleted? why you reverted back to the small section in Neom Article? All other cities in Neom Project have their own detailed article. Please let me know what's needed to get the article back?Ravan (talk) 12:24, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The short answer is write the article in your own words. I removed your edit because it was simply copied from material at:
this site S Philbrick(Talk) 12:29, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm trying to rewrite the article but it's redirected and can't be edited.
Could you please remove the redirect and I'll create it with my own words and reliable resources right away?Ravan (talk) 09:05, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm embarrassed to say I don't remember the exact steps on how to do that. My vague recollection is that best practices are to create the new article as a draft article, possibly with a different name if it doesn't like you having a draft article for the same name as a redirect, then asked someone how to move the draft article to the name.
Once you've created the draft, almost anyone at the Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions could help you with the next step. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:35, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Potential wrong reverting of my edit.

[edit]

Hi, I am Lutitium. You have recently reverted one of my edits for copyright violations saying that,"In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick"

The article in this case the article was Oldoway Man, but I say that this revert of my edit for the reason of copyright violation was unnecessary as the things I edited were links, citations and some text.

As far as the images used in this article go, I have acquired them from Wikimedia Commons, with both of them having the CC0 license.

One more thing that I would like to add is that I am literally the guy who made the article and uploaded the images on Wikimedia Commons under the CC0 license.

I know that I am a new user and that you are much more qualified than me but I sincerely request for you to the permit me to get my edit back and if not, provide me with an appropriate reason.

User:Lutitium Lutitium (talk) 04:57, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You mentioned: "...the things I edited were links, citations and some text."
I had no problems with any of the links, citations or images but I do have a problem with the text you added.
I won't repeat it because that's a copyright violation, but you copied four consecutive sentences from an article published by Time. You might've preferred that I use a scalpel and only remove the problematic text but it is considered standard practice to do a rollback when encountering a copyright issue.
I do see that many parts of your edits were likely to be acceptable. I did email you a copy of the article after your edits to help you recover any of those edits. S Philbrick(Talk) 10:50, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, sorry to interrupt again, but I am having some problems in transferring the email you sent. Can you please send it on my talk page instead of my E-mail? I am really sorry for interrupting you again. Lutitium (talk) 09:54, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also emailed you the problematic text. S Philbrick(Talk) 10:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Lutitium (talk) 08:28, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red August 2025

[edit]
Women in Red | August 2025, Vol 11, Issue 8, Nos. 326, 327, 344, 345, 346


Online events:

Announcements:

Tip of the month:

Other ways to participate:

--Rosiestep (talk) 14:52, 30 July 2025 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sphilbrick&oldid=1303361538"