User:Diannaa/Copyright
Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.
The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page.
Thank you for your interest in creating an article for this organisation for wikipedia. There are several problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.
The second problem is notability. I am not sure the organisation is notable enough, as Wikipedia defines it, to have an article. We require write-ups in reliable third party sources such as newpapers, magazines, or online publishers to establish notability. New articles about persons or organisations that are not notable are typically speedily deleted.
The third problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page.
So if you wish to add the copyrighted content to a Wikipedia article, the proper licenses and permissions will have to be in place. Please see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how that would be done. Or, you could write a new article that does not closely paraphrase the material available online. And you would have to avoid the conflict of interest guideline while doing so. Even then, chances are that the article would be speedily deleted as not notable enough for an article. Sorry the reply could not be more favourable. Regards,
Hello. I am Diannaa and I am a Wikipedia administrator. I noticed you are uploading images, all of which are now tagged for deletion. Please don't upload any more movie posters or images that you find on the Internet or elsewhere until you are sure you understand our copyright policy and our non-free content criteria. Non-free images such as movie posters and still shots from films are only allowed at low resolution and under strict guidelines. The guideline is available at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. There's more information about copyrights and how it applies to Wikipedia at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. As you can see, the copyright policy and its application are complex matters, and you should not upload any further images until you have taken the time to read and understand our policies. Thank you.
Hello. I am Diannaa and I am a Wikipedia administrator. I noticed you are uploading images, all of which have been tagged for deletion or are already deleted. Please don't upload any more photos that you find on the Internet or elsewhere. Photos that you find online are copyright, and we are not allowed to display them on Wikipedia. There's more information about copyrights and how it applies to Wikipedia at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. The Wikipedia copyright policy and its application are complex matters, and you should not upload any further images until you have taken the time to read and understand our policies. Continuing on your present course will likely lead to a block. Thank you.
Hello. I am Diannaa and I am a Wikipedia administrator. Please don't upload any more photos that you find on the Internet or elsewhere. Photos that you find online are copyright, and we are not allowed to display them on Wikipedia. You should only upload photos that you have taken yourself. Also, prose you find online is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the copyright policy of this website to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. The Wikipedia copyright policy and its application are complex matters, and you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policy. There's a simplified version of our copyright rules at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. Further copyright issues will result in you being blocked from editing.
Hello. I am Diannaa and I am a Wikipedia administrator. Prose you find online is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the copyright policy of this website to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. The Wikipedia copyright policy and its application are complex matters, and you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policy. There's a simplified version of our copyright rules at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. Further copyright issues will result in you being blocked from editing.
Under current copyright law, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright. Exceptions include works of the US Government and material specifically released under license. Even then, proper attribution is required. Have a look at some of the links I placed on your talk page for more info.
The reason we started using indef block is because if we do it that way the editor cannot resume editing until they provide us with a clear statement that demonstrates that they have read and understand our copyright policy and intend to follow it in the future. There's been many people who simply resume what they were doing, to the detriment of the encyclopedia. Copyright is a very serious issue and this is one of the ways we are trying to control it. Sorry if that seems harsh.
Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material (short properly attributed quotations are allowed, but cannot be used as a substitute for writing your own content). One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase, and don't try to include every single detail. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. It also helps to have more than one source to draw from. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Paraphrase: Write It in Your Own Words. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study this module aimed at WikiEd students.
Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves. You must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. The material that I removed was 63 words copied verbatim from a copyright web page elsewhere on the Internet, without a citation and without quotation marks to indicate that it was a direct quote. That's a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Quoting this passage is not a good alternative, because it could easily be re-written into copyright-compliant prose. While I do occasionally paraphrase the copyvio material myself, given the volume of copyvio reports that are filed each day and the amount of time it takes to assess and clean the articles and notify and/or discuss with the editors involved, it's not possible for me to perform re-writes in each instance. Removal of the copyright material from the page history was done under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy.
Since the work has been previously published elsewhere, that means that the material is copyright and we can't use it here until such time as it's released under a compatible license. This is done in order to protect the rights of copyright holders. We have in place what we call the VRT ticket system, whereby copyright holders can provide proof via email that they are the copyright holder. In the email you would also specify which license you wish to use. There's a list of compatible licenses here and a sample permission email here and detailed instructions here. Sorry it's all so complicated but these are legal requirements that keep us in compliance with the policies of this website.
I have blocked your account, because in spite of repeated warnings, you continued to add copyright material to Wikipedia in violation of our copyright policy. You cannot resume editing until you provide a statement describing how copyright applies to Wikipedia, show that you understand our copyright policy, and make a commitment to follow it in the future.
In order to lift the block, we need to be certain that you understand how copyright works on Wikipedia. Please respond to the following questions, explaining in your own words:
- What is copyright?
- How is Wikipedia licenced?
- Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia?
- Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?
- How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?
Your answers will enable us to establish whether or not you should be unblocked.
We have rules about quotations, and what we're supposed to do is use only short quotations, and only if there's no alternative. There's no set limit on the size or number of quotations. That said, Wikipedia articles should for the most part be written in our own words, and quotations used only when absolutely necessary. For a book, it would be more appropriate to provide a few short excerpts (one or two sentences) from reviews rather than extensive quotations from the book itself or from an interview with the author. Wikipedia:Non-free content#Text says "Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea"; "Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited." Please see Wikipedia:Non-free content, especially Wikipedia:Non-free content#Text, and the essay Wikipedia:Quotations for more details.
The problem is that you are presenting the same ideas in the same order using the same sentence structure, while only substituting a few of the words. You can't just reword phrases and substitute different nouns; the content has to be completely re-written using your own words. Chronological material does not have to be presented in a different order, but it can be difficult to re-work, as can direct clean prose. Closely paraphrasing extensively from a non-free source may be a copyright problem, even if it is difficult to find different means of expression. If you can't figure out a way to re-write the material, you can't add it to Wikipedia.