User talk:Wiki142B
May 2024
Hello, I'm MrOllie. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Aquaponics seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 23:58, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Can you please mention which sections did not seem neutral so i can adjust it please, I added quite a lot of details into my edit and they were about many different people. Wiki142B (talk) 00:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- All of them. Your writing is full of value-laden wording: examples include 'significant', 'pioneering', 'visionaries', 'significant strides', and so on. Please don't remove just those words and put the edits back - those are examples. You need to get familiar with how things are done on Wikipedia. WP:NPOV and WP:NOR are core policies here. MrOllie (talk) 00:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
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 Integrated Aqua-Vegeculture System, 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:
- Copying text from other sources
- Policy on copyright
- Frequently asked questions on Wikipedia's copyright policy
- Policy and guideline on non-free content
If you still have questions, there is the Teahouse, or you can and someone will be along to answer it shortly. As you get started, you may find the pages below to be helpful.
- Introduction
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- How to create your first article
- Simplified Manual of Style
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) 12:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- The material I added is 100% open source and copyright free and I also asked permission from one of the authors. ~~~~ Wiki142B (talk) 21:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- The edits I added were removed due to copyright concern, but they are in fact not coyright and when I tried to restore what was deleted the page is removed and there is nothing left in the delete log? Is this normal? Wiki142B (talk) 21:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- The place where I found the matching content is here. I was able to download a copy of the article from ResearchGate and it is a 1993 journal article. There's no evidence that this article is free of copyright. In fact, open licenseing such as Creative Commons did not yet exist in 1993. If the copyright holders with to release the article under a compatible license, we need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. (We can't take your word for it that someone has given you permission to post it here.) The revisions containing the copyright material were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that's why you can't access them any more. — Diannaa (talk) 02:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- That is incorrect.
- When you view the full content from Wiley you can see that the first 2 pages are the ONLY pages that contain the article journal and were taken from pages 331 and 332 of the journal. If you skip forward to page 428 there is an copy of the actual paper, as written in the journal where it says: "Full scientific article from which this summary was written begins on page 428 of this issue."
- The copy at Researchgate was uploaded by one of the authors and is a direct photocopy of the paper as it was published in the journal, that is why it contains mention of the journal at the bottom of the pages on the researchgate link, but. most importantly, it does not contain ANY journal article or original content and it should not be removed.
- In summary, the paper itself is a total of 5 pages long. The content on Researchgate is 5 pages in total. The content on Wiley has an additional 2 pages, the extra 2 pages on Wiley are the journal article and those 2 pages were not added to this wikipedia page. .
- IAVS and all it's research has been made open source and therefore copyright free and was advertised on the website that is run by one of the authors you can see at https://iavs.info/tale-a-tour/
- I will contact the author and ask to have a cc license added, if this is not needed, please let me know.
- . Wiki142B (talk) 04:49, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- 'Open source' is absolutely NOT the same thing as 'copyright free'. And even if the text in question is copyright free - it must be added in a way that properly credits the author(s). MrOllie (talk) 11:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Noted, thank you. Wiki142B (talk) 22:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yes please do contact the author(s) and have them send us an email releasing the material to the public domain or under license. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa (talk) 14:06, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Will do, thanks for the advice. Wiki142B (talk) 22:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- 'Open source' is absolutely NOT the same thing as 'copyright free'. And even if the text in question is copyright free - it must be added in a way that properly credits the author(s). MrOllie (talk) 11:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- The place where I found the matching content is here. I was able to download a copy of the article from ResearchGate and it is a 1993 journal article. There's no evidence that this article is free of copyright. In fact, open licenseing such as Creative Commons did not yet exist in 1993. If the copyright holders with to release the article under a compatible license, we need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. (We can't take your word for it that someone has given you permission to post it here.) The revisions containing the copyright material were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that's why you can't access them any more. — Diannaa (talk) 02:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- The edits I added were removed due to copyright concern, but they are in fact not coyright and when I tried to restore what was deleted the page is removed and there is nothing left in the delete log? Is this normal? Wiki142B (talk) 21:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Notice
I reverted one of you edits at Integrated Aqua-Vegeculture System for being out of scope. Just thought to be courteous and inform you, since it looks like you put a lot of effort into the edit. However, most people looking for the IAVS probably would not be looking for the entire academic histories of people who contributed to it, only, well, the IAVS itself and maybe a small amount of backstory about its invention. Bremps... 03:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, this is great timing, I realized I was creating a "wall of text" that is against wikipedia's recommended guide and so I stopped to seek advice before putting in a lot of work that may be deleted or not needed. I also wondered if some of the figures are notable enough to have their own pages, such as Merle Jensen, Paul Nelson and Doug Sanders. Would it be appropriate to list the members of the research group, but skip any additional information about them? Wiki142B (talk) 04:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think removing the entire entry was going too far, I think it should stand that the research team should be credited, perhaps it would be better to put in paragraph format to avoid a 'wall of text'. You said "most people looking for the IAVS probably would not be looking for the entire academic histories of people who contributed to it" and I will counter by suggesting that the research group should be credited, but I will also agree that their academic history need not be posted. I will wait for further comment, if no reply is received I shall add the list of researchers involved in paragraph form but not go into details about them. Wiki142B (talk) 04:07, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, listing significant contributors is reasonable. It's best to filter through them to find the most important few names and to state what they specifically contributed in prose form, probably under a section called "Invention" or "History". Listing them one by one, like "John, Mary, Jane, Joe, Maria, Albert, Qiang, Roberto, Sato, Gordon, Harry, Elizabeth... Liza and Alfonso contributed" would not be advisable, however. Bremps... 04:13, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think I should include the principle investigator, the co-investigators and the principle consultants, but how would I do this without mentioning their names "one by one" and how would I do this to avoid going into detail about their academic histories? If I add the information into the 'talk' page, would you be interested in writing the content for the actual article? Wiki142B (talk) 04:17, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's a weird story of how I got here, but no, I'm not as familiar with the technical content of the article as you. I would recommend consulting the discovery of the neutron page for inspiration on formatting and prose. Bremps... 05:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, I will take the time to read that page before any additional edits or additions. I had assumed all new edits were checked by moderators, if your 'weird story of how you got here' is suitable for a 'talk page' I would love to hear it! Wiki142B (talk) 06:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- There's this website called Listen to Wikipedia. Every recent Wikipedia edit is translated to a "ding", with large ones translated to a "dong". It sort of makes wind-chime style music. I was using it to relax while doing work (try it!) when I heard a really loud "dong". That was your edit. I just wanted to see what that was about. Bremps... 17:17, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, I will take the time to read that page before any additional edits or additions. I had assumed all new edits were checked by moderators, if your 'weird story of how you got here' is suitable for a 'talk page' I would love to hear it! Wiki142B (talk) 06:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's a weird story of how I got here, but no, I'm not as familiar with the technical content of the article as you. I would recommend consulting the discovery of the neutron page for inspiration on formatting and prose. Bremps... 05:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think I should include the principle investigator, the co-investigators and the principle consultants, but how would I do this without mentioning their names "one by one" and how would I do this to avoid going into detail about their academic histories? If I add the information into the 'talk' page, would you be interested in writing the content for the actual article? Wiki142B (talk) 04:17, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, listing significant contributors is reasonable. It's best to filter through them to find the most important few names and to state what they specifically contributed in prose form, probably under a section called "Invention" or "History". Listing them one by one, like "John, Mary, Jane, Joe, Maria, Albert, Qiang, Roberto, Sato, Gordon, Harry, Elizabeth... Liza and Alfonso contributed" would not be advisable, however. Bremps... 04:13, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think removing the entire entry was going too far, I think it should stand that the research team should be credited, perhaps it would be better to put in paragraph format to avoid a 'wall of text'. You said "most people looking for the IAVS probably would not be looking for the entire academic histories of people who contributed to it" and I will counter by suggesting that the research group should be credited, but I will also agree that their academic history need not be posted. I will wait for further comment, if no reply is received I shall add the list of researchers involved in paragraph form but not go into details about them. Wiki142B (talk) 04:07, 2 July 2024 (UTC)