User talk:ManfredHugh

6000:{{unblock|reason=I need to convince you that I understand the reasons for the block. Reading copyright guidelines, I do acknowledge the violation. In this last incident the copyright editor had to remove about 400 words (including citations) from my edit concerning John Toland to the page Freethought. As best as I can reconstruct my edit, this is because it included wording direct from the cited source (1) that Toland "gained a reputation as ‘a man of fine parts, great learning, and little religion’"; (2) that at Leiden and Oxford he was "introduced to John Locke and GW Liebnitz with whom he corresponded" and (3) that he emphasised "the ultimate importance of applying reason to matters of both religion and politics". I do see that that this more than "close paraphrasing", which is itself problematic under Wiki policy, and that it creates a copyright issue. I should have taken more time with this edit, and have provided original wording. Unless you have some suggestions, what further I can do or say to show that I understand the reasons block or that I will take more care in future. In the hope of some eventual reprieve, I can only ask you to et against a number unacceptably careless edits with regard to copyright, I have years of extensive and positive contributions to Knowledge, acknowledged by readers and other editors, and that in my errors there has been no suggestion of any nefarious purpose. Clearly, I should have paid more attention to earlier warnings. Thanks for your consideration ] (]) 10:38, 1 May 2023 (UTC)}} 1903:

efforts (he is not even sharing what he considers the joke). If FDW777 describes my efforts at amending (earlier sections) as "gobbeldygook" is the Wiki community really any the wiser? (and is that an example of what he means by encyclopedic language?). If FDW777 says I stray from the subject (which sounds as if he about to say something constructive--to offer actual criticism) but then refuses to give ANY INDICATION of what the line is that I might have crossed (that apparently would be "pointless"), or any example, is that "good reasoning"? Efforts are dismissed "pretentious twaddle": fine, maybe one shouldn't consider that abusive or take it personally, but is that really how we should be commenting on other people's efforts (however lamentable we might find them)? Or is it just a cop out on the commentator' part? You leave me confused, but thank you for your time.

6200:

and guidance and will accord with the U.S. Fair Use doctrine. Among other things, this means that the material can be used for purposes only of genuine criticism and commentary and cannot be so voluminous or complete as to in any way supercede, or substitute for, the original work. In practice, this means that the resort to quotation should be restrained, and consideration given to rewriting the cited ideas or information in one's own words. Generally quotation should be brief, and be seen to illustrate a particular point, context or idea.

5819:

something either from this source, or from an original source it cites, and I put it in quotation marks would that be a problem. But anyway you say I have had several incidents of this nature, but that is out of over 9,000 edits over the last three years, the great majority of whom have stood the test of time. Fine I am blocked now, but given the nature and extent of good faith, and community accepted, contributions is there not some prospect of restatement--if only after a time. Are there any steps you can recommend. REgards

2493: 3582: 1825: 1735: 6268: 5244: 4472: 4407: 4347: 3150: 3098: 2961: 2027: 1413: 1153: 1101: 1049: 3893: 6501: 5157: 4226: 2774: 7060: 6881: 5848: 5644: 3449: 1288: 1205: 6788: 5503: 4938: 3930: 538: 212: 129: 3282: 5566: 5387:; the structure, presentation, and phrasing of the information should be your own original creation". That being the case I am not sure how I have overstepped the bounds of using "the webpage as a source of information", which, as you say, is "perfectly okay", and have used it as "a source of prose". Maybe you find that there is some paraphrasing that is too close to the original? I'll try amending it now. Regards~~~ 3983:" so much. I am impressed by your depth a scholarship, the quality of your English, and your ability to find sources. I have a lot to learn from you. You will see that I have nevertheless made some bold changes on some of your edits, mostly to try to keep the citation style what I call Sfn-Cite. I except the citations from London Gazette, which do not lend themselves to that style. With many thanks and best regards, 5077: 4739: 4076: 3526: 349: 1887:. As an uninvolved editor, though, I will tell you that I don’t think the other editors are being uncivil, and I do think they’ve explained themselves well. Formal dispute resolution likely won’t get you far in this situation. Rather, you need to convince editors on the article’s talk page of the merits of your proposed changes. You won’t always win arguments, though, and you need to be okay with that outcome. — 6591: 4707: 4695: 3409: 4015:. You write about Whig influence on the biographical subject and cite Hyde 1933 p9. You certainly know your history. However, I read up in the source and found nothing about whig influence on Alexander on that page. Perhaps you cited the wrong page? Also, when citing, please follow the established citation style (use the Sfn template). Many thanks and best regards, 4054:

With regard to our example, you will see that I like to add a "footquote". This is neither obligatory nor forbidden. See WP:FOOTQUOTE. I also give a line in addition to the page. This is only needed when the same page is cited more than once but differently (e.g. with different footquotes). I use REF quotes for websites. With many thanks and best regards,

6015:

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. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. It helps if you have more than one source to draw on. There's some reading material on this topic at

4489:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see 3167:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see 3115:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see 2044:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see 1430:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see 1170:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see 1118:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see 1066:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see 548:. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Knowledge's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Knowledge can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate 222:. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Knowledge's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Knowledge can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate 139:. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Knowledge's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Knowledge can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate 6635: 4703:. It reminds me of the fun that Knowledge can be. To be honest, I just planed to do some work on the article so to have Dnipro high on my "user contributions list" after I will stop making significant contributions to Knowledge since 22 June 2022 due to the need to pursue other interests. But this collaboration is a nice bonus 6205:

With appropriate attribution for sources cited, it is possible to copy material from other Knowledge pages. It is also possible to copy text from public domain sources (again with attribution) licensed under a compatible licencing scheme. One can copy material that can be construed as "bare facts" in

6014:

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

5933:

This has been my mistake and I have had warnings about including wording or sentences without quotation marks from sources I have cited before. So no excuse. But as I have made thousands of edits (including whole pages) without such mistakes, might there be an option of blocking me for period, rather

5626:

Diannaa, As the material at issue has been removed I cannot see what the exact copyright issue is. Every source I use is cited, so I take it that it must be a turn of phrase. Fair you told me to be careful, but I am responsible over the years for many thousands of edit and incidents like this are but

5342:

So, if I understand correctly, the problem is not how material has been drawn and cited from this NZ webstite, rather it is that the source website's licence precludes it from cited in any manner as a source for material where, as in Knowledge, this can reproduced on commerical websites. I would have

2744:

page. This vote is essentially concerned with the debate over whether certain extreme Suffragette actions can be classed as terrorist acts and, therefore, be included on said list. Having seen that you have previously done some really interesting edits on such Suffragette activities at pages relevant

1882:

with other editors on talk pages. From what I can see, you’ve explained your positions thoroughly and they’ve been rejected by multiple editors with good reasoning. Therefore, I think it is unlikely that you will be able to gain widespread support for these changes. If you have new arguments to make,

6477:

Duncan. I've started using the Rp template to reference repeatedly cited sources, and will generally try to clean up the formatting of references. But I don't suppose you meant imply that "reference errors" such as Stewart (1995) having "multiple targets" or Pakenham (1998) "missing publisher" are,

6199:

4. I missed the obvious: that almost all Knowledge pages in citing their sources will reference copyrighted material. This material will be properly cited and where lines or phrases from the original are reproduced, they will formatted as quotation and will follow Knowledge's non-free content policy

4865:

you changed the statement to read that " substantial investment in schools and housing consistent with growth of population of the town and its immediate environs". Without changing the sources. Again, neither the 2001 census nor the contradictory webpage makes any mention of growth in investment in

6897:

status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original

6296:

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright

6169:

Some of this information is incorrect or incomplete.In point #2, you have listed something that is not part of a CC-by license and omitted the actual rights and obligations of that license.In point #3, you state that Knowledge could be held responsible for the actions of downstream users. Where did

6142:

Copyright material is not allowed on Knowledge because it opens the foundation to legal suits and claims for damages, and is incompatible with Knowledge's status as an open-source/free-content encyclopedia--a copyright violation on Knowledge can result in multiple violations by downstream users for

5263:

for more information on uploading your material to Knowledge. For legal reasons, Knowledge cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use

4426:

4366:

3465:

2980:

6847:

and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion

5752:

Yes. Looking at the removed edits, there are two sentences which are exact copies of the source material, and other chunks that have minor changes. That's just not acceptable, and I agree you've been warned about this extensively. Since you're not able to realize that you're doing this, unblocking

5031:

3955:

3047:

for the rationale instead of writing out one manually. The one you added is OK per se, but the bot that goes around checking files like this is looking for a link to the article where the file is being used and the rationale you provided is missing said link. So, there's a good chance the bot will

1917:

You’re welcome. You seem to have missed my point, though, which is that you must work your disputes out with other editors directly. If you have an issue with another editor, take it up with them on their talk page. Trying to involve other editors in your dispute will get you nowhere. It is not my

1857:

Please help me with... Could someone please review the discussion on the Talk page for Irish Nationalism. I have had edits challenged and reverted. In itself this is fine. But as I have tried to solicit an explanation I have encountered anger and abuse, and now a demand from FDW777 that pre-clear

7196:

This image is from Openverse and I see, checking with the Openverse site, is licenced for public use not, as I mistakenly listed by Creative Commons "CC BY 4.0 DEED, Attribution 4.0 International", but rather by "CC BY-NC 2.0 DEED Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic". This says "you are free to

6195:

3. Sorry, I did not mean to imply that, as a general proposition, Knowledge could be "held responsible for the actions of downstream users", but only that if (in good faith) others reproduce Knowledge material, as they are free to, and that this includes violations of copyright that Knowledge has

4053:

at Template:Sfn. Knowledge's general guideline for how to cite is at WP:CITE. The shortcut WP:CITEVAR points to the section that asks users to adhere to the established citation style of the article or otherwise to consult other editors to change the citation style. I have occasionally done that.

5818:

Thanks Diannaa. Unfortunately the CopyPatrol reports states "the revision ID couldn't be found 11523282102 so I cannot see the exact problem. But is does report that there were 83 words from the source I cited. That's bad. It includes you said a brief quotation--I cannot recall, but if I quoted

1902:

Thank you for this Tartan. I am well prepared to loose an argument and I am not "pushing ahead". But am I to accept as "good reasoning" the characterisation of someone's contribution (not mine in this case) as "laughable." All this communicates is that FDW777 feels contempt for whoever-it-was's

1873:

This isn’t an appropriate way to raise concerns with another editor; you should reach out to that editor on their talk page. I did read the thread, though, and will try to give you some advice. I don’t see any "anger" or "abuse" directed at you or a failure by others to explain their reasoning.

4857:

two sources were added (the 2001 census and a webpage that contradicts the census data) to support a statement that "Ballymoney has seen extensive new housing and business development consistent with growth of population of the town and its immediate environs". Neither the 2001 census nor the

6421:

I'll do that. But are you sure that the "reference errors" justify entirely restoring a version that not only has its own reference errors (include a lack of sources), but which fails in addressing the actual subject by devoting the greater part of the text to "background" that is that is not

6146:

Copyright material can be used when express permission has been secured from the copyright holder (which must include the understanding that the material can be used freely within Knowledge and by all downstream users), or, in very limited and exceptional, circumstances is can used as per the

2749:

being put forward that the most notable actions would be included but with a disclaimer that not everybody agrees on the description of these acts as 'terrorism'. If you are interested, your input in the discussion would be greatly welcomed, and you may want to cast a vote in the vote that's

4567:

While it is not directly copied from the source, this is still close enough to be a copyright violation, which you have been previously warned about. Looking over your recent edits it appears you have been keeping mostly free of copyright issues, so you may not know that this sort of close

1953:

Tartan, yes I see I didn't follow protocol and several days ago made it clear that I am not trying to press ahead or appeal the reversion of my edits to this article. There have been real problems with my contributions made clear to me those who have taken a moment to explain the issues.

5729:

I am responsible for many thousands of edits. In a handful of cases I seem to have reproduced a phrase, perhaps not even a complete sentence, without quotations marks from a CITED source. I understand that that is a problem, and it shouldn't happen but does it really justify blocking?

1883:

the article’s talk page is the place to make them. If you take issue with another editor’s behavior, you can leave them a message on their talk page. If you and another editor are locked in an intractable content dispute, you can request third-party dispute resolution as described at

3685:

be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Knowledge. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable,

7246:

Understand, but this section really isn't devoted to Harriet's marriage. Maybe the material related to activities attracting government surveillance, and which are deserving of separate cnsideration, could be broken out into a separate section. But I leave it to you. regards~~~

1874:

Instead, I see people disagreeing with you, you not getting it, and them having to be more direct. There aren’t any personal attacks here, and you should know that abuse is not an accusation to make lightly. You can familiarize yourself with what constitutes a personal attack at:

5753:

you would put the project in a poor legal position and waste more of our very limited copyright volunteer's time. At this point, there would need to be some very specific recognition of the problem, and an outline of the steps that you would take to prevent it from recurring.

1004: 996: 4099:

and is not acceptable. Most mirrors are clearly labeled as such, but some are in violation of our license and do not provide the correct attribution. Please help by adding alternate sources to the article you edited! If you need any help or clarification, you can look at

6623: 6053:

Hello, I have commented out your most recent unblock request as you have decided to take an extended break. Please ping me when you have had time to look through some of the mreading material and exercises that I provided and are interested in applying for an unblock. —

364:, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the 5057:.. The only connection to this page that is reproduces an address that the subject of the article Jack White gave in 1936, and from which this page, at one point, quotes citing another webpage that does exactly the same thing, reproducing the original 1936 address. 4042:

Dear Manfred. Thanks for your reply. Your citation points to the right place, my apologies. I made a mistake. I went back and changed your citation to use Sfn. Please have a look. I find one always learns most easily by example. You will find the documentation for

6369:, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Knowledge. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on 1236:" link (it is located at the very top of any Knowledge page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in 6196:

failed to identify and exclude, Knowledge might be held responsible. Perhaps I was wrong in that. But the key point remains: copyright violations by Knowledge create the potential for financial liability and, perhaps no less important, for reputational damage.

6084:

Dianna, I have looked through the reading material and exercises you recommended and I both understand and appreciate the principles involved. Doing too much, I think, on Knowledge I had become careless. Would you now consider lifting my block? Regards, ~~~

3209:, you added a ref using a name that was already defined in the article for a different reference. Try to check on duplicate ref names before adding them, or use preview on your edit to make sure you haven't caused a ref error. I've fixed it. Happy editing! 989: 3033:. You will receive a notification of this probably within the next day or so on your user talk page; so, if you just do nothing, the file will be deleted in about five days. You can, however, speed things up by tagging the file for speedy deletion per 7205:). I don't see how to amend my original upload, or whether the attribution available when a wiki reader clicks on the image and selects "More details" is sufficient. Sorry, I find it difficult to understand and navigate these technical protocols~~~ 4978:. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of 6187:

2. Under the terms of the Creative Attribution-ShareAlike Unported license I see that contributors to wiki pages must respect copyright by attributing any work drawn upon or cited "in the manner specified by the author or licensor of that work"

7120:

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to

1000:. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Knowledge, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator. 6138:

Knowledge is licensed under the term of the Creative Attribution-ShareAlike Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License which, among other things require that contributors avoid copyright infringements as defined by the Berne

1162: 5934:

than indefinitely. This would certainly give pause to consider how much more careful I have to be in future, and to avoid late night, early morning editing. It there are any other steps you can recommend it would appreciate it. Regards

6715: 1147: 6440:

Errors included "Stewart1995 has multiple targets", "CS1 maint: location missing publisher" on Pakenham, Thomas (1998). The Year of Liberty: The Great Irish Rebellion of 1798, "Madden1860 has multiple targets". I suggest you install

6828:. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Knowledge. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at 6262: 5800:. Click on the iThenticate link to view what was found by the detection service. It shows an entire three sentences (and a brief quotation). This is completely unacceptable, especially in light of the fact that you have received 6220:

Now you have covered the material that you need to know and demonstrated that you have taken the time to study and understand the relevant policies and guidelines. I will unblock you now. Welcome back, and happy editing. —

3705:

Also note that Knowledge articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Knowledge project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at

5382:

Reading the link provided we find that "Facts cannot be copyrighted. It is legal to read an encyclopedia article or other work, reformulate the concepts in your own words, and submit it to Knowledge. But be careful not to

1282: 6170:

that incorrect information come from?Point #4 is not specific enough. There's a couple of types of material that are okay to copy. If you could find out what they are and how to properly use them that would be great. —

3563:

Sorry, I accidentally pasted a URL citation in the middle of a sentence, which yes gave it the appearance of an unfinished edit. I fixed this in what is a update on government supported resettlement since 2002. Thanks

6075: 6619: 4029:

Johannes the citation seems to be correct, page 9 (beginning of 2nd paragraph) of Hyde's published book, a digital copy comes up on the link. Sorry, I am not familiar with the Sfn template. Where do I look for this.

2008:

I can empathise as when I started on this site I was harangued by a overtly republican editor. After upping my game in terms of editing quality they found nothing they could complain about and they quickly shut up.

6763:

GrahamI35, thanks. Please do delete the page. It was my mistake. I got the name of th subject wrong--it is Richard, not Robert, Rutledge Kane, and I have transferred the content to a new corrected page. Regards~~~

5343:

thought that the purpose of a non-commerical licence would have been to prevent material from being directly reproduced, in whole or in part, on commercial site--as regularly happens with Knowledge articles.

3674:

in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Knowledge, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.

6313: 6277: 120: 6150:

Make sure never to cut and paste anything directly onto a wiki page with the intention of editing, as one can lose track of what is original copyrighted wording, and be conscious of the hazards of close

529: 6720:

but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the

5528:

Thanks Diannaa, can you explain the nature of the copyright violation. I have added further material to the Vere Foster article and am not sure whether I have repeated the same inadvertent error. ~~~

1232:

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "

6530:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 5186:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 4253:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 2801:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 1330: 1296: 1255: 1058: 5513:, including a final warning, for violations of our copyright policy. I am not going to block you for this minor violation but please be alterted to the fact that you are on your last chance here. — 1304:. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from 1043: 3918: 7228:

I reverted your recent edit because Shelley's political radicalism didn't begin with his marriage to Harriet and wasn't confined to this period. Also better to keep the section headings concise.

3416: 2036: 1934:

template is not for requesting action by another editor. It is for you to get help with certain tasks on Knowledge. I’ve already told you how to pursue dispute resolution if you want to do that.

1222: 1213: 1110: 1095: 6818:. First, thank you for your contribution; Knowledge relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – 1199: 2021: 1038: 3403: 1858:

any future writing with them. Maybe I am getting something very wrong. Serial Number 54129 I thought was going to arbitrate but I don't how to get an appeal through to this editor. Regards

7157:

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. Here is

4685: 3952: 3937: 3923: 6862:. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the 6099:

I would be happy to unblock, but first we need to be certain that you understand how copyright works on Knowledge. Please respond to the following questions, explaining in your own words:

5306:

I am confused. My edit, which drew upon and fully cited a NZgovt history website, and which did not involve quotation, has NOT been removed. What appears to have been removed is the line

7068: 3508:

Yes, I can see this must have been taken shortly before Milligan's death in 1953, so it is conceivable that there could be a copyright issue. I'll see if I can find further information.

5328:

is released under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 New Zealand Licence, which is not a compatible license, as it does not allow commercial use, and our license does. —

5127:

from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at

3107: 3022: 203: 7054: 6546: 6387:

Yes, Frankie Quinn, the creator of the image (it is his photograph of Des Wilson) has sent his release of copyright to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. It just has to be processed.

5202: 4269: 2817: 1775: 1315:

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with

6407:, as they caused multiple reference errors. Please slow down, do smaller edits, and after each one make sure you check that any references you have added or changed work correctly. 3092: 3736:

Dianna, thank you for this. The material in the two brief sections reverted are referenced and used what I thought was a normal and usual manner. Maybe they need more paraphrasing.

6515: 5171: 4239: 3429:

to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you.

2787: 1768: 6297:

holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the

6135:

Copyright is a recognition of an exclusive right to print, publish or otherwise record an original work of authorship, and consequently defines and creates intellectual property.

5000:

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Knowledge to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you

6899: 6889: 6844: 6814: 6781: 6706: 1352: 1194: 6866:

and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Knowledge looks forward to your future contributions.

6690: 4481: 5956:

Putting an end date on the block does nothing to convince us that you understand the reasons for the block. The block can be removed when you do that- this request doesn't.

6340: 6071: 4926: 3424: 1836: 99: 4466: 1760: 1422: 572:- just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well. 246:- just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well. 163:- just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well. 6478:

in themselves, sufficient reason to remove text? If that were the case, might we not lose half the encyclopedia? But again, I will proceed more cautiously. Regards ~~~

5093: 3467: 3457: 4891:

You are not missing anything. The cited references do not support the observation which, wherever it comes from, in any case conveys little. I'll remove it. Thanks ~~~

7076:. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license. 6779: 4767: 3542: 3443: 3314: 2714: 1407: 545: 531: 6875: 4873:

of the census returns from 1981, 1991, 2001 or 2011), how would the sources support the editorial about housing growth, business development or schools investments?

2920: 2283: 3969: 3944:, because the image is an unused duplicate or lower-quality copy of another file on Knowledge having the same file format, and all inward links have been updated. 4182: 3795: 2852: 2680: 2229: 607: 474: 432: 390: 5912: 5708: 5365: 3695: 3486:

to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Knowledge. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a

1277: 4599: 4306: 3698:

copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See

2886: 2626: 2515: 2441: 2374: 1756: 695: 653: 281: 6918:

to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Knowledge. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is

6041:

Dianna. I will follow your suggestions, and won't think of returning to contributing for some time. A break would probably be salutary. Thanks for your patience

5131:

to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at

1090: 7190: 5360:

It's perfectly okay to use the webpage as a source of information, but not as a source of prose. Knowledge is not a commercial website, but our license allows

3063:, the less likely the file's non-free use is going to be challenged. The reason why most magazine covers used like this end up getting removed is explained in 2340: 2145: 2107: 2068: 5272:, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Knowledge takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy 4435:, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Knowledge takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy 4375:, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Knowledge takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy 2989:, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Knowledge takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy 1142: 6366: 6351: 5990:

template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.

5790:

template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.

3886: 3438: 3335: 3238: 2073: 1357: 943: 859: 813: 3051:

Finally, adding a rationale (with the aforementioned link) will stop the bot from removing the file, but it's doesn't automatically means the file's use in

193: 4869:

Even if the two sources didn't contradict each other, and even if the zhujiworld.com gave accurate population data (rather than numbers which do not match

3159: 3015: 2759: 2583:

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with

1685: 1643: 901: 771: 3139: 6652: 5460: 5426: 4803: 4296: 3974: 3897: 3829: 3812: 2843: 1984:

and understand the changes I made to that section. Try to implement that on the rest of the article and you will find less trouble from certain editors.

1571: 1501: 602: 3369: 3144: 3041: 1459: 219: 205: 6757: 6618:" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( 5047: 4672: 4658: 3992: 6316:. If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a 4677: 4513: 3604:.) While we appreciate your contributions to Knowledge, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid 3322: 6870: 3503: 2949: 2746: 2737: 2335: 1308:

is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Knowledge policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an

7020: 6905:

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a

5144: 4211: 3473:

If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a

2881: 2709: 2278: 1454: 648: 519: 469: 427: 6947: 4335: 2915: 2675: 2544: 2470: 2436: 766: 690: 337: 6986: 6952: 2369: 2224: 2140: 1783: 276: 7079:

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

3364: 3267: 2480:

You didn't label the content so I decided to caution you, then again you created it and i assumed you didn't, Sorry. Also do you want some pie?

2102: 1402: 1007:, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on 984: 896: 854: 6573: 6079: 5229: 3913: 1981: 1722: 1680: 938: 808: 629: 500: 5542:

I am not seeing any copyright violations in the new additions. Simply don't copy text from your sources and there won't be any violations. —

3858: 3763:

Okay, that's fine. I have been unable see how the issue of copyright arises in this instance, but the omitted passage is not critical. Thanks

1786:. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. 1638: 1566: 6709:, for deletion, because it is a very short article that doesn't provide readers with enough context to determine who or what the subject is. 3398: 3318: 1496: 4725: 3718:

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be

3589:

have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the

3202: 6898:

copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the

4576:

to include plot details, which cuts out the problematic part altogether. If you have any further questions about copyright, please ask me.

3466:

copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the

3191: 569: 243: 160: 3081:

Thanks Marchjuly for this, it was very helpful. I couldn't find the Non-free rational serial publication template. I will look for it now.

1610: 7088: 6932: 6685: 5489: 5455: 4832: 4216: 3980: 2764: 1963: 1948: 1912: 1897: 7102:, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter 6382: 4063: 4024: 7147: 6647: 6581: 6345: 2741: 2013: 2003: 1305: 1226: 408: 7049: 1867: 7015: 6981: 6852:. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the 5280: 5256: 5009: 4443: 4419: 4383: 4359: 3600: 3288: 2997: 2973: 1808: 613: 480: 317: 7240: 4174: 2498:

I give this pie to people I accidentally do something "wrong" to such as wrongfully accusing them or accidentally cautioning them.

7166: 5888: 5684: 5260: 5005: 4423: 4363: 3699: 2977: 2621: 6020: 4501: 3300: 3179: 3127: 2056: 1442: 1316: 1237: 1182: 1130: 1078: 3824: 3272: 1815: 1309: 1300:. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Knowledge may not meet the criteria required by 400: 1518: 6722: 6493: 5149: 4927: 4105: 3919: 3805: 1810: 625: 496: 5008:. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see 1588: 7256: 4160: 4006: 2507: 1878:. As for your desire to continue to push for these changes, you should be aware that decisions on Knowledge are made through 313: 3330: 1221:, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Knowledge is acceptable. Please go to 7220: 7186: 6569: 6442: 5225: 5132: 4448: 4292: 3222: 2839: 2396: 2171: 1602: 1312:; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale. 63: 7214: 3784: 3757: 3731: 3722:

from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. —

3029:

to the file's page. The first version of the file you uploaded is now orphaned and will be tagged for speedy deletion per

1606: 552:, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like 226:, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like 143:, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like 7174: 6923: 6833: 6370: 6328: 5975: 5775: 5603: 5522: 5494: 4763: 4144: 4140: 3491: 1477: 1383: 1320: 1245: 1008: 965: 919: 877: 835: 789: 595: 269: 186: 39: 7198: 6615: 6362: 5579: 5120: 5101: 3791: 3707: 3076: 1703: 1661: 404: 7143: 6487: 5069: 4918: 4900: 4485:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 3163:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 3111:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 2040:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 1426:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 1166:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 1114:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 1062:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 450: 6906: 6773: 6472: 6317: 6235:

Dianna, thank you. You volunteer for an important job. I am sorry to have taken so much of your time. Best wishes~~~

5883: 5679: 5346:

So is it the case that nothing can be drawn from, and nothing can be attributed to, this NZ govt. website? Thanks~~~

5081: 4755: 4743: 4012: 3474: 2730: 2549: 1844: 1241: 1233: 396: 353: 71: 22: 4583: 738: 6454: 6416: 6244: 6230: 6215: 6179: 6164: 6128: 6094: 5860:

Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the

5656:

Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the

5636: 5551: 5537: 5410: 5396: 5377: 5355: 5337: 5319: 3775:

The problem is that the text was pretty much identical to the source. That's a violation of our copyright policy.—

712: 671: 385: 6565: 6007:, no matter what their length of service here or their number of good edits, has to follow our copyright policy, 5906: 5702: 5221: 4288: 4101: 3575: 3196: 2926: 2835: 1779: 524: 198: 5875: 5671: 4524: 4395: 1922:

Like I said, the others appear to have explained themselves quite well. Decisions on Knowledge are made through

1514: 303: 6829: 6820: 6355: 6305: 5584: 5308:

The Mau grew, remaining steadfastly non-violent, and expanded to include the highly influential women's branch.

5088:

a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into

4971: 3660: 3633: 3558: 3420: 3308: 3009: 1918:

place to make your arguments for you if they fail, or to evaluate FDW777’s attitude and lecture them about it.

1023: 291: 5871: 5667: 4490: 3815:, this is a reminder not to copy-paste text into Knowledge article without using quote marks or paraphrasing. 3168: 3116: 2045: 1988: 1584: 1431: 1171: 1119: 1067: 7158: 7151: 6919: 6324: 4854: 4461: 3995:

Thanks Johannes for your generous comments. Anything I write is of course open to correction and improvement.

2745:

to Suffragette actions, I thought that this might be a debate that would interest you. Currently, there is a

2383: 1798: 584: 258: 175: 115: 53: 6854: 5897: 5693: 3881: 6797: 6742: 6539: 6016: 5587:

by copying text or images into Knowledge from another source without evidence of permission, as you did at

5384: 5195: 5089: 5028: 4963: 4947: 4931: 4787: 4642: 4569: 4312: 4262: 4188: 3652: 2810: 2600: 4588:

Thank you. I have followed your advice and omitted details of librwetto's plot, which solves the problem.

3487: 107: 7236: 7110: 6551: 5207: 5085: 4274: 4080: 3341: 2822: 2503: 1473: 1379: 961: 915: 873: 831: 785: 136: 122: 6323:

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is

3790:

Although referenced, more of it should either have been in quotation or better paraphrased. My mistake.

3711: 7170: 7136: 7129: 6893:. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the 6849: 6607: 6583: 6398: 5943: 5916: 5893: 5739: 5712: 5689: 5596: 5033: 4862: 4486: 4121: 3957: 3629: 3461:. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the 3014: 2415: 2402: 2251: 2184: 1764: 1699: 1657: 1510: 1301: 1018: 579: 253: 170: 5300: 3896:

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at

3321:. (Search for 'error:' in the revisions before and after your edit.) I have since fixed this error. -- 446: 25:. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: 6378: 5902: 5861: 5698: 5657: 5574: 5275: 5128: 4993: 4438: 4378: 4059: 4020: 3988: 3719: 3534: 3206: 2992: 1034: 286:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

7073: 5879: 5675: 4147:

the same reference. I've fixed this for you again - please be more careful when evaluating sources.

734: 7182: 6804: 6643: 6063: 6036: 5855: 5840: 5813: 5651: 5619: 4954: 4411: 3820: 2755: 2614: 2483: 1884: 1791: 1727: 1580: 823: 708: 667: 295: 5965: 4885: 4770:

for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on

74:, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Knowledge. You can visit the 7026: 6603: 6404: 5310:

This was a line in the wiki article as I found it, and of which I was not the author. Regards~~~

5112: 3656: 990:

Image tagging for File:The Agreement It's Your Decision (with rationale & reduced size) 2.jpg

58: 7202: 5765: 5509:

I have removed a minor copyright violation from the above article. I see that you have received

3872:

clearly indicates this article, in particular Troubles related parts of it, are subject to 1RR.

299: 7232: 4792:

The “unconstructive” edit appears to have been a Google Book online link to a cited reference.

4747: 4720: 4608: 4518: 3901: 3545:. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on 2499: 1927: 93:(~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out 44: 30: 6354:. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Knowledge uses a set of 4776:

Adding an external into the body of the article. External links go in the external links only.

6527: 6336: 6024: 5432: 5183: 4771: 4340: 4250: 3554: 3546: 3244: 2798: 2447: 342: 6712:

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can

6263:

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Police shots of Helmut Roloff 1942.jpg

1741:

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect.

6943: 6914: 6538:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 6468: 6450: 6412: 6374: 6299: 6290: 5286: 5252: 5194:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 5042: 5013: 4914: 4881: 4759: 4580: 4415: 4355: 4261:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 4055: 4016: 3984: 3801: 3482: 3326: 2969: 2954: 2858: 2809:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 1348: 1273: 1244:

and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the

1030: 307: 82: 34: 6189: 5325: 5324:

I've temporarily undone the revision deletion so you can view exactly what I removed. The

8: 6753: 6639: 6595: 5831:

If you click on the "iThenticate report" link, you should be able to view the overlap. —

5592: 5017: 4351: 3816: 3072: 3064: 2892: 2751: 2631:

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

2607: 2579:

Thank you for creating this article. Perhaps you could divide it into lede and sections.

2564: 2379:

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

2288:

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

2238: 2234:

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

2154: 2150:

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

1975: 1923: 1879: 1576:

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

1506:

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

1465: 1363: 949: 907: 865: 819: 777: 700:

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

379: 369: 94: 7163:

Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged

5366:

Knowledge:FAQ/Copyright#Can I add something to Knowledge that I got from somewhere else?

4165:

Thank you. I didn't understand the issue at first. I have since corrected the citations.

3681:

own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you

3655:. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to 310:, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. 7084: 5124: 5116: 4400: 4096: 3863: 3379: 3215: 2592: 1848: 1695: 1537: 75: 6931:

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the

3620:

amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double

7197:

copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format", provided that you "give

7103: 7045: 7011: 6977: 6681: 6509: 6460: 6226: 6175: 6124: 6059: 6032: 5836: 5809: 5615: 5547: 5518: 5485: 5451: 5406: 5373: 5333: 5296: 5165: 5140: 5097: 4828: 4732: 4713: 4457: 4391: 4331: 4233: 4207: 3965: 3854: 3780: 3753: 3727: 3594: 3394: 3360: 3296: 3263: 3056: 3005: 2945: 2911: 2877: 2781: 2705: 2671: 2540: 2466: 2432: 2365: 2346: 2331: 2274: 2220: 2136: 2098: 2079: 1718: 1691: 1676: 1649: 1634: 1562: 1492: 1398: 1338: 1263: 980: 934: 892: 850: 804: 762: 686: 644: 515: 465: 423: 357: 333: 324:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

6119:

Your answers will enable us to establish whether or not you should be unblocked. —

4527: 3059:; so, the more specific you are as to why the file's non-free use satisfies all ten 7248: 7206: 6867: 6765: 6705:

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged an article that you started,

6558: 6523: 6479: 6429: 6388: 6332: 6236: 6207: 6156: 6086: 6042: 5984: 5961: 5935: 5866: 5820: 5784: 5731: 5662: 5628: 5529: 5388: 5347: 5311: 5237: 5214: 5179: 5061: 4892: 4793: 4780: 4664: 4651: 4614: 4589: 4553:

a magic ball that predicts a future that will bring harmony between the two worlds.

4281: 4246: 4166: 4129: 4092: 4031: 4011:

Dear Manfred Hugh. Thank you very much for your addition of content to the article

3996: 3909: 3877: 3764: 3737: 3565: 3550: 3530: 3519: 3509: 3499: 3434: 3375: 3228: 3082: 2862: 2829: 2794: 2720: 1995: 1955: 1904: 1859: 1831: 555: 438: 229: 146: 16: 6425:

It would helpful if you give me some idea of reference issues to which you refer.

6023:. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study 5123:

for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a

4850:

article, and I noted some VER/RS issues that I hope you can perhaps help with(?)

1755:. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called 1148:

Orphaned non-free image File:The Agreement It's Your Decision (with rationale).jpg

6939: 6464: 6446: 6408: 5470: 5104:. Instead, the software used by Knowledge has a feature that allows pages to be 5054: 5037: 4975: 4967: 4910: 4877: 4577: 4509: 4316: 4069: 3648: 3248: 3187: 3135: 3060: 2492: 2409: 2064: 1926:. You clearly do not have a consensus for these edits, so I strongly suggest you 1875: 1450: 1344: 1269: 1190: 1138: 1086: 361: 86: 6922:. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the 6848:

tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

5032:

tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

4966:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under

4534:. Below, I have bolded the parts of your addition that overlap with the source: 3956:

tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

3941: 3940:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done under

3490:. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the 7150:

justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See

6992: 6859: 6749: 6699: 6631: 6535: 5761: 5191: 4990:. Knowledge takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators 4751: 4258: 4153: 4114: 3671: 3621: 3538: 3068: 3052: 2896: 2806: 2686: 2525: 1939: 1888: 1541: 1218: 997:

File:The Agreement It's Your Decision (with rationale & reduced size) 2.jpg

953: 911: 781: 730: 599: 591: 484: 374: 365: 273: 265: 190: 182: 104: 6630:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a

6206:

the public domain such as scientific data, poll results and sports scores.~~~

598:. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- 272:. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- 189:. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- 6863: 6825: 6531: 5559: 5187: 4843: 4618: 4572:

has some advice on how to avoid this, and I also have some advice: you don't

4254: 3835: 3691: 3590: 3210: 3026: 2965: 2802: 2648: 2572: 2521: 2298: 2292: 2160: 1375: 704: 659: 563: 549: 237: 223: 154: 140: 4684: 7041: 7037: 7007: 7003: 6973: 6969: 6958: 6677: 6673: 6403:

Hi, I am sorry but I have felt it necessary to revert your recent edits to

6222: 6171: 6120: 6055: 6028: 5832: 5805: 5611: 5543: 5514: 5481: 5477: 5466: 5447: 5443: 5402: 5369: 5329: 5292: 5136: 4824: 4820: 4453: 4387: 4327: 4323: 4203: 4199: 4192: 4088: 4047: 3961: 3869: 3850: 3846: 3776: 3749: 3723: 3625: 3586: 3390: 3386: 3356: 3352: 3345: 3292: 3259: 3255: 3164: 3112: 3034: 3030: 3001: 2941: 2937: 2907: 2903: 2873: 2869: 2701: 2697: 2667: 2663: 2536: 2532: 2462: 2458: 2428: 2424: 2361: 2357: 2327: 2323: 2270: 2266: 2216: 2212: 2197: 2132: 2128: 2113: 2094: 2090: 2041: 2010: 1985: 1752: 1714: 1710: 1672: 1668: 1630: 1626: 1558: 1554: 1529: 1488: 1484: 1427: 1394: 1390: 1283:

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:O'Neill Lemass postage stamp 2.jpg

1167: 1115: 1063: 976: 972: 930: 926: 888: 884: 846: 842: 800: 796: 758: 754: 682: 678: 640: 636: 511: 507: 461: 457: 419: 415: 329: 325: 49: 7098:

Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to

4858:

contradictory webpage makes any mention of growth in housing or business.

4531: 6962: 6796:

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

6662: 5957: 5602:

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the

5588: 5496: 4946:

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

4809: 4084: 3905: 3873: 3495: 3430: 2654: 2641: 2635: 2310: 2257: 2190: 2121: 1920:

You need to work this out with the other editors in the dispute directly.

1617: 827: 745: 723: 719: 621: 492: 6542:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

6114:

How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?

5259:

from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read

5198:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

4422:

from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read

4362:

from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read

4265:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

3021:

Hi ManfredHugh. For reference, you didn't need to reupload this file as

2976:

from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read

2813:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

1734: 1337:

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the

1262:

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the

6729:

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with

6519:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

6303:

to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Knowledge. The page on

5175:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

4847: 4813: 4505: 4243:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

3644: 3609: 3183: 3131: 2791:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

2350: 2244: 2164: 2060: 1936:

In any case, you must try to resolve your disputes on talk pages first.

1595: 1545: 1446: 1186: 1134: 1082: 287: 6832:. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at 5023:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may

3947:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may

3037:. As for the second file you uploaded, I suggest you use the template 6894: 6839:

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may

6666: 6500: 6422:

generally recognised as having a direct connection to the rebellion.

5755: 5156: 4837: 4225: 4148: 4109: 4083:. However, one of Knowledge's core policies is that material must be 3605: 3462: 2773: 2568: 2558: 2306: 1824: 1469: 1217:. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under 617: 5797: 5364:, and therefore the source website is not compatibly licensed. See 4699:

I am really enjoying this unplanned collabo we seem to be doing on

4139:

It appears this is a problem again. You added another clear mirror

3667: 2451: 2302: 1653: 488: 442: 5251:

has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added

4414:

has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added

4354:

has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added

3813:

Talk:Sir Edward Crosbie, 5th Baronet#Potential copyright violation

3281: 2968:

has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added

7074:

https://openverse.org/image/191ef524-924e-4213-802e-378a9ad07a21/

6658: 5591:. Please take this opportunity to ensure that you understand our 5436: 3868:

Please self-revert your edit maade against consensus at Belfast.

3839: 2083: 537: 211: 128: 7025: