User talk:Watercolor121: Difference between revisions
Watercolor121 (talk | contribs) |
→Charing Cross, Lahore: another link might help... |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
::The sections that you added were copied verbatim from http://www.dawn.com/2003/09/21/fea.htm . That's a copyright violation (in addition to being simple [[plagiarism]]). I don't know what you mean about "the relevance of it with the link you posted". Are you referring to the link to [[WP:copyvio]]? --[[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 17:16, 10 September 2010 (UTC) |
::The sections that you added were copied verbatim from http://www.dawn.com/2003/09/21/fea.htm . That's a copyright violation (in addition to being simple [[plagiarism]]). I don't know what you mean about "the relevance of it with the link you posted". Are you referring to the link to [[WP:copyvio]]? --[[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 17:16, 10 September 2010 (UTC) |
||
:::Yes I was. |
:::Yes I was. |
||
::::Hmmm... That page is complicated, isn't it? (I think it was easier to read in the past.) The key point related to your edits is "Material copied from sources that are not public domain or compatibly licensed without the permission of the copyright holder (unless brief quotation used in accordance with non-free content policy and guideline) is likely to be a copyright violation." See [[WP:Copy-paste]] for a more straightforward explanation. --[[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 02:53, 11 September 2010 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 02:53, 11 September 2010
Welcome to my user-talk page! (Watercolor121 (talk) 12:54, 6 September 2010 (UTC))
Headings
Hi. Just so you know, the Wikipedia manual of style says you do not put links into section headings. Thanks. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:14, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
- Umm, I've seen this style on numerous American articles therefore I had no idea. So I guess I got misguided. Sorry :) (Watercolor121 (talk) 22:16, 9 September 2010 (UTC))
Categories
Hey..just remember, when you create articles, don't forget to add them into categories i.e. Origins of Lahore into Category:History of Lahore etc. This makes them indexed with relevant topics, and they can also be easily found. Mar4d (talk) 01:35, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for the tip! I'm in the process of editing it. It looks like a mess right now. (Watercolor121 (talk) 06:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC))
Charing Cross, Lahore
I regret that I had to remove the two new text sections you added to Charing Cross, Lahore because they were copied from a source. That's a WP:copyvio -- something Wikipedia cannot allow. --Orlady (talk) 16:25, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Umm, what do you mean by copied from a source? Plus I did not understand the relevance of it with the link you posted (Watercolor121 (talk) 16:48, 10 September 2010 (UTC))
- The sections that you added were copied verbatim from http://www.dawn.com/2003/09/21/fea.htm . That's a copyright violation (in addition to being simple plagiarism). I don't know what you mean about "the relevance of it with the link you posted". Are you referring to the link to WP:copyvio? --Orlady (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yes I was.
- Hmmm... That page is complicated, isn't it? (I think it was easier to read in the past.) The key point related to your edits is "Material copied from sources that are not public domain or compatibly licensed without the permission of the copyright holder (unless brief quotation used in accordance with non-free content policy and guideline) is likely to be a copyright violation." See WP:Copy-paste for a more straightforward explanation. --Orlady (talk) 02:53, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Yes I was.
- The sections that you added were copied verbatim from http://www.dawn.com/2003/09/21/fea.htm . That's a copyright violation (in addition to being simple plagiarism). I don't know what you mean about "the relevance of it with the link you posted". Are you referring to the link to WP:copyvio? --Orlady (talk) 17:16, 10 September 2010 (UTC)