Crispy385

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 13:33, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

April 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Godzilla (franchise) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• |''[[The Return of Godzilla]]'')
• |''[[The Return of Godzilla|Godzilla 1985]]'')

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Stanley Cup winning players

Hello,

I just saw your message to me (I'm not on here much anymore). Feel free to use anything from the page you referenced (User:Leech44/List of player names on the Stanley Cup) A few things to note though:

1. The format of the page has changed since it was first mentioned on the Talk:Stanley Cup winning players page. I think that it is easier to read if you are adding which teams they were playing for for each year.
2. Changes have been made to the functionality that makes the current sort-ability problematic because it it is repeating players for each year line they won a Cup.
3. I'm not sure the best way to fix that issue since combining the year into one line would then prevent them from any useful sorting.
4. If your updating the Stanley Cup winning players page you'll have to decide if you want to narrow the scope. The page currently includes guys who did not qualify to have their name engraved, but may have been given rings or included in team pictures. When I started creating the list I was using the rosters from NHL.com that are in the reference at the bottom of the page or the NHL Guide and Record book if you can find one at a library. Some of the players on the current page are not included in these rosters
5. Players in the bottom table probably need to be combined into the top table (My page was originally meant to be a list of player who were engraved on the Cup)
6. The years on the bottom table might need to be altered since it was in part the challenge up era, so some of the winners only held the Cup for months before losing to another squad. It doesn't always follow the season format (YYXX-XZ) though for consistency that's how it is currently set up.
7. If you combined all of the players into a single table as opposed to the alphabetic sections the page currently has, you'll probably want to add a sorting box like some of the list of team players have.
8. As for "Should I not bother?" I'm always in favor of page improvement so if you feel that you can change this into a sortable table I say go for it.
   

Cheers, --Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 17:58, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Aliens: The Female War

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Aliens: The Female War, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://avxhome.se/magazines/aliens_female_war_tpb.html.

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. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:14, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether it's an official summary or not, the text is still copyrighted if the source doesn't explicitly say otherwise and it can't be used here. Hut 8.5 21:36, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

So, how is posting the official summary (aka, the one from the back of the book) different from posting the cover of the book? Should it not fall under the same Fair Use category. Also, that website is a fan community site unaffiliated by either Fox or Bantam Books (not to mention flagged as malware by my protection), so how can it claim any sort of copyright? I'm not just trying to be difficult; these are legitimate questions. I'm new to Wikipedia, so I'm still learning the ropes here. Crispy385 (talk) 04:55, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter who wrote the text, because somebody did and that person has the copyright unless they explicitly disclaim it. It is possible for texts to be in the public domain if they were written a long time ago, but that clearly isn't the case here. If the source uses the right licence then we can also use it, but you'd need to provide evidence of that. Incidentally I wouldn't assume that the site linked by the bot is the original source of the work, that's just where the bot found it. The same summary text is being used in numerous places throughout the internet including by people selling the book and I suspect it may well have been written by the publisher.

You're right that it is possible to claim fair use on quotations, but not this one. There's an explanation at WP:COPYQUOTE. Basically quotations need to be brief, attributed and not excessively used. If you wanted to write something like Fred Bloggs, a reviewer for Some Magazine, wrote that "the book is really great, I read it obsessively and couldn't put it down" then that would be fine - that quotation is attributed to the source, is very brief and the article hopefully won't consist of quotations. (You can often see articles about books, films or music using quotations like this.) What you did in this article is closer to copying huge chunks of Fred's review without giving any indication that he wrote it. For fair use of images (which have lots of complex restrictions) we also have a principle that you can't use a fair use image if it's possible to create a free equivalent. Here anybody who has read the book would be able to write their own summary without using copyrighted text.

If you're new or don't know what you're doing with respect to copyright (which is entirely understandable) then my advice would be to avoid copying text from other places when writing articles. That way you definitely won't run into any problems. Hut 8.5 17:38, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

OK, that makes sense. Thanks for taking the time and spelling it out for me!Crispy385 (talk) 05:28, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 17:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Crispy385. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. 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 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Crispy385. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. 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 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)