User talk:USHMMwestheim
NOTE
[edit]This user is in fact affiliated with the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Content the user posts that is a copyvio from the USHMM is A-OK - they know what they're doing, and gave permission via OTRS ticket ticket #2007071910012533. If there are any problems with this account, PLEASE contact me before taking action. Thanks. Phil Sandifer 19:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Deleted pages
[edit]Yep - no problem. Sorry you've been running into trouble. Can you give me a list of the articles that were deleted?
Also, I've gone ahead and made a user page for you that will hopefully forestall some future problems. Phil Sandifer 19:07, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
It all should be back.
You may be able to avoid future problems by noting in the edit summary of the first edit something like "Uploaded by the USHMM. See OTRS ticket 2007071910012533 for details." Or, really, anything that mentions the OTRS ticket number - that will allow the relevant people to quickly check and verify that you have the copyright for the material you're adding and that you're deliberately releasing it under the GFDL. Phil Sandifer 21:48, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
Duplicate images uploaded
[edit]Thanks for uploading Image:Buchenwald Survivor Identifies Guard 1.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Buchenwald Survivor Identifies Guard.jpg. The copy called Image:Buchenwald Survivor Identifies Guard.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.
This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 15:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
USHMM Article Deleted
[edit]Sorry about that. I didn't see an OTRS note attached to the article. You should always leave a note on the article's talk page if you're relying on OTRS permission to copy text from somewhere else. I also copied Phil's note to the top of this page, because this is where people will come to notify you about copyright problems. Hopefully, they'll see the note first. I have restored the article about blacks in Nazi Germany. Let me know if you need further assistance. Cheers! -- But|seriously|folks 22:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have perfomed a web search with the contents of Yitzhak Gitterman, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007093. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites 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.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 17:45, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- This page is a copyvio apparently, since the page in question claims copyright. If it's been released, the article needs to mention that as the source, otherwise it's plagiarism. --W.marsh 18:39, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have perfomed a web search with the contents of Josef Nassy, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005677. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites 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.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 18:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Request
[edit]To avoid plagiarism concerns, it is really best if you add this to any articles you create using material from the site in question:
- This article incorporates text from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, and has been released under the GFDL.
That will clear everything up. Add it to the bottom, in a section called "notes". --W.marsh 18:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- It seems to me that USHMMwestheim has followed the route described on WP:DCP "If you want to grant Wikipedia permission to use material from your site, but don't want to place a statement to that effect on your site, you can leave us a notice to that effect on the article's talk page (or on your user page if your site covers a number of topics)....Someone from Wikipedia will then contact that email address to confirm the permission, and we will be able to add your site to a list of those from which our editors may freely draw". And that confirmation that USHMMwestheim did this is at the top of this page, on the talkpage of the articles and in the edit summary when he created the article. --Slp1 19:02, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- Indeed. My understanding is that this bureaucracy is not needed. We have confirmed the permissions, they know they're releasing under the GFDL. Phil Sandifer 19:05, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- It's still potentially plagiarism unless this guy wrote every article he's uploading. It's best to just attribute where text is coming from... it's what we always do with articles from PD/GFDL sources when OTRS isn't involved. --W.marsh 19:11, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- It's not plagiarism. He is acting as a representative of the copyright holder and donating the text to Wikipedia under the GFDL. As he is acting directly on their behalf, as an employee of the USHMM, no further notice is necessary. The connection is made on every article, whether on the talk page or edit summaries, with appropriate notice so that the permissions can be verified. Phil Sandifer 19:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- Why is it so bad to say that text was originally written and published by some group other than Wikipedia? What's in the article is what counts, talk page comments and edit summaries are rarely distributed perfectly alongside the article. It's standard practice to just add a simple attribution... --W.marsh 20:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
- It's not plagiarism. He is acting as a representative of the copyright holder and donating the text to Wikipedia under the GFDL. As he is acting directly on their behalf, as an employee of the USHMM, no further notice is necessary. The connection is made on every article, whether on the talk page or edit summaries, with appropriate notice so that the permissions can be verified. Phil Sandifer 19:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
question about copyright
[edit]please respond to my question at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Judaism#United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Jon513 11:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
The destruction of the German garrison in Lenin
[edit]- Please edit page The destruction of the German garrison in Lenin whuich you wrote, to say where this place called Lenin is. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright concerns; tagging
[edit]Hello, USHMMwestheim. Thank you for pointing out your copyright concerns with Image:WhiteRose.jpg. I'm dropping you a line just to let you know that the tag that you placed on the image, {{copyvio}}, is specifically used for text that violates copyright. Images are also no longer handled at the copyright problems board, although not all guidelines have been updated to reflect that. For images that are clear copyright violations, you can follow the procedure for speedy deletion. For images that are suspected to be copyright violations, we have a review board for possibly unfree images. For images used under suspect non-free content criteria, we have non-free content review. This particular image should be listed at the last if you believe it does not meet non-free content guidelines. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
If you come back, please consider activating your email, so editors can contact you that way if you are away again. We hope you'll come back and collaborate with us in the future once more, --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:05, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
NowCommons: File:Kaufering Dachau 82763.jpg
[edit]File:Kaufering Dachau 82763.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Kaufering Dachau 82763.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Kaufering Dachau 82763.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 22:58, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
The file File:Heslop Ebensee.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unused, low-res, no obvious use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
The file File:Nuremberg Race Laws 73901.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Low-resolution scan of text; illegible and thus not useful.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Wikiacc (¶) 02:59, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
