Dmakeshi
| This user is a student editor in University_of_Wyoming/Architectural_History_(Fall_2018) . |
Welcome!
editHello, Dmakeshi, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia and copyright
edit
Hello Dmakeshi, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Episcopal Palace, Astorga 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 public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
- You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
- Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
- Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
- If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may 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 Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible 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 Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
- In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
- Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Elizium23 (talk) 01:07, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
December 2019
edit
Your addition to Episcopal Palace, Astorga has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia 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 external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Elizium23 (talk) 01:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Repeat copyright violations
edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Hi, I received an notification of the block. Copying content verbatim is seen as a copyright issue and plagiarism, even if you were to include the original source as a citation. Always be careful when writing article content - a good way to avoid doing this is to take notes while reading and write your article from those notes.
- Unless the material is explicitly marked as falling into the public domain or was released under a compatible Creative Commons license, it should be assumed that the content is copyrighted in a way that would prohibit it from being used verbatim elsewhere. It's always best to write things in your own words, as this can help prevent issues like this from arising. I would like for you to review the module on plagiarism and copyright, thanks. --Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:32, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Peer Review
editHello, All of your contributions on this site have been well thought out and you have added a lot to Episcopal Palace in Astorga. I believe some of it was removed, so some advice is just be mindful of what you are typing! I struggled a lot with this myself because it was hard to know where Wikipedia draws the line within their copyright guidelines. While reading about the palace, I feel satisfied with the amount of information. The date it was built, what it is built out of, etc. is all there and it feels like a complete and reliable source of information. The organization of the article makes sense and I do not feel myself getting lost. I am left wondering if there is any recent news about the building. I do not think it is always necessary or maybe there isn't anything about it but I like that the article left me wondering about the current state of the building. All of the information within the article has a neutral stance as well, making it nice to read. I would like to see more sources of information, but all around this is a really excellent article! good job!
Kcheshir (talk) 23:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
I peer reviewed your articles. Not sure exactly everything you added but overall good interesting articles.
Payton Gonzalez```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgonzal7 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Peer Review
editOverall I think what you have done to the article is great, yet a bit limited. While you do have a lot of great information on this history of the site, there are no sections at all on construction, design, ect. An improvement I might suggest would be to find out more about the design of the building both aesthetically and structurally, after all this is an architecture class! Best wishes, AdamsJ5674 (talk) 03:42, 10 December 2019 (UTC)