User talk:Cees iupui

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

New username[edit]

This user now edits exclusivly as User:SeeEarth. Send all messages for him to User talk:SeeEarth. Thank you. DES (talk) 20:35, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment
Comment
 Your account is at risk of being blocked for your editing conduct. Please read these warning messages. If you do not understand or have questions, ask one of us at our talk pages or add {{helpme}} to your talk page before creating any similar articles.

—C.Fred (talk) 17:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Arbor logo-sm.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Arbor logo-sm.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Copyright status of Restoration Research Projects: CROOKED CREEK[edit]

Please do not post copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to Restoration Research Projects: CROOKED CREEK. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites (http://cees.iupui.edu/Research/Restoration/Crooked_Creek/index.htm in this case) or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

  • If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
  • If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Restoration Research Projects: CROOKED CREEK with a link to where we can find that note;
  • If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on the article Talk page. Alternatively, you may create a note on your web page releasing the work under the GFDL and then leave a note at Talk:Restoration Research Projects: CROOKED CREEK with a link to the details.

Otherwise, you are encouraged to rewrite this article in your own words to avoid any copyright infringement. After you do so, you should place a {{hangon}} tag on the article page and leave a note at Talk:Restoration Research Projects: CROOKED CREEK saying you have done so. An administrator will review the new content before taking action.

It is also important that all Wikipedia articles have an encyclopedic tone and follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you want to edit constructively, take a look at the welcome page. Thank you. Janarius 16:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles, as you did with Restoration Research Projects: CROOKED CREEK. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:
  1. Place {{hangon}} on the page. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag(s).
  2. Make your case on the article's talk page.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. -WarthogDemon 16:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status of SCOTT STARLING NATURE SANCTUARY WETLAND RESTORATION PROJECT[edit]

Please do not post copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder, as you did to SCOTT STARLING NATURE SANCTUARY WETLAND RESTORATION PROJECT. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites (http://cees.iupui.edu/Research/Restoration/Starling/index.htm in this case) or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) then you should do one of the following:

Otherwise, you are encouraged to rewrite this article in your own words to avoid any copyright infringement. After you do so, you should place a {{hangon}} tag on the article page and leave a note at Talk:SCOTT STARLING NATURE SANCTUARY WETLAND RESTORATION PROJECT saying you have done so. An administrator will review the new content before taking action.

It is also important that all Wikipedia articles have an encyclopedic tone and follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you want to edit constructively, take a look at the welcome page. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 16:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. As the caution below the edit box reads, "Content that violates any copyright will be deleted." It is always inappropriate to create an article by include copyright text wholesale without permission. —C.Fred (talk) 17:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning.
The next time you create an inappropriate page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Do not introduce any more articles which violate copyright. I have deleted at least a half-dozen blatant violations which you have created. —C.Fred (talk) 17:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<REDACTED> There is no current block on this user, for any reason. My mistake. LessHeard vanU 14:26, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent contributions to Wikipedia[edit]

It appears to me, and to some others that have looked into that matter, that you have been editing both as User:Cees iupui and as User:Iupuicees. It also appears that there have been some problems with your contributions. But it seems to me that you are trying to make positive contributions to the Wikipedia project. I want to help you learn how to do that, and avoid future problems. This message is sent in an attempt to be make things work better for you on Wikipedia. DES (talk) 16:41, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright issues[edit]

First, about copyright issues. Wikipedia has a legal duty not to violate other people's copyrights. A lot of people seem to think that anything on the web is free for use by anyone, in any way, and so a lot of people post content copied from websites to Wikipedia without permission. Therefore, when we find that things have been copied from a website, it gets treated as a copyright infringement.

Wikipedia attempts to be a free content resource. It is released under the GFDL. this means that even if someone has permission from a website owner "to post the content to Wikipedia" that isn't sufficient. Wikipedia needs to have assurance that the copyright owner knew and agreed to permit anyone to reuse the content, for any purpose, including permission to change it, or sell it, or both; and that this permission, once granted, can never be withdrawn. Lots of people who say that they are posting "with permission" didn't fully understand this, or the site owner who granted permission didn't.

Since Wikipedia is funded by donations, it can't afford to risk a copyright lawsuit. Therefore, if someone is posting copyrighted content "with permission" we need a letter or email from the copyright owner confirming the permission. If you want, i can point you to some standard boilerplate requests for permission that show you what is involved.

Rewriting makes better articles[edit]

Second, even when content is validly posted with permission, other websites often don't make good encyclopedia articles. They have been written for their own purposes, which usually includes promoting a person, firm, institution, project, or cause. But Wikipedia articles are supposed to adhere to the neutral point of view. That means that they describe facts, citing sources where those facts can be verified. That also means that they describe the opinions that people have expressed about those facts, but they attribute those opinions to specific, named individuals or publications, and they cite sources to demonstrate this.

This means that it is almost always better to rewrite based on a source than to copy directly, even if the source is not copyrighted, or has given permission. If direct quotes are made from a source, they should be marked as quotes and a source should be cited. For example, in describing an organization, it may be a good idea to quote its proclaimed mission statement. One might write something like On its website, the FooBar association has said that its mission statement is: "Blah Blah Blah" <citation link>

You crested a number of articles about projects undertaken by the "Center for Earth and Environmental Science" of Indiana University & Purdue University. This seems like a good thing. But you did this in most cases by simply copying text from the website of the project involved. This is a bad thing, even if you had permission, and it is illegal if you didn't. Wikipedia probably should have good articles on these projects. You would probably be a good person to draft such articles. i am willing to help you do that.


User names[edit]

Third, about user names. It is generally best if a single editor has a single user name. Sometimes a user wants a different username to work on different subject areas. A person might want one username for religious topics, and a different one for political topics, for example. But in working on a single topic area, it can get confusing if one editor uses multiple usernames. Also it can give the impression that the editor is trying to avoid restrictions by using multiple accounts. Trying to evade restrictions by using different accounts is, of course, not permitted.

Also, user names which duplicate the names of organizations are generally not permitted. For example User:IBM would not be allowed. partly this is because we cant be sure that a user really is an "authorized spokesperson" for the organization, and partly because the username itself can be seen as promotion, a form of advertising. Imagine User:Joe's Pizza. Both your usernames seem close enough to the name/acronym of the organization whose projects you seem untested in to possibly be a problem.

What I want from you[edit]

Fourth, what you need to do.

  1. Please select a user name that you will use from now on, at least in this subject area. It can be either of the names you have used so far, or a new name. (I would recommend a new name, but your existing names are not sufficiently obviously organizational for me to insist.)
  2. Please indicate in a message which user name you will be using from now on. Please also indicate that you understand the points about copyright and rewriting i have made above, and that you intend to comply.
  3. You may place this message on User talk:DESiegel, or on User talk:Cees iupui or on User talk:Iupuicees. I will watch both user talk pages.
  4. Please wait for my response to your message, or a response from another administrator or experienced editor. If you don't' get a response within a reasonable time, you can put {{helpme}} on you user talk page next to a request for assistance, and someone should be along shortly.

What I will do for you[edit]

Fifth, what I will do when i get your message.

  1. If you choose to use User:Iupuicees, which is currently blocked from editing, I will unblock it.
  2. I will offer advice, if you wish it, on how to contribute to Wikipedia more effectively, and how to use the various editing tools, citation templates, wiki formatting, and the like.
  3. I will notify the administrator who blocked User:Iupuicees that the matter is being dealt with.
  4. I will, if you wish, review and help you improve any future articles.
  5. If you wish, i will offer a formal mentorship, asking any editor or administrator who has a problem with your actions to contact me before taking significant action.

I hope all this will be helpful to you, and allow you to make many positive contributions to Wikipedia. I await your message. DES (talk) 16:41, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New username[edit]

This user now edits exclusivly as User:SeeEarth. Send all messages for him to User talk:SeeEarth. Thank you. DES (talk) 20:35, 1 August 2007 (UTC)'[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cees_iupui&oldid=148569764"