Erik Cornelisse

Your submission at Articles for creation: Digital Shadow (November 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Kvng was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Digital Shadow and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~KvnG 20:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Erik Cornelisse, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! ~KvnG 20:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

There is a fundamental difference between a digital footprint and a digital shadow. Just like leaving footprints in the sand while walking on the beach, your shadow keeps following you. The same analogy is applicable because digital footprints are scattered across the Internet and left behind, while all information about the subject (entity) is being collected intentionally and kept together inside the digital shadow. A digital shadow is a collector while digital footprints are residu's. This fundamental difference justifies a separate article. Erik Cornelisse (talk) 15:52, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Copyvio notice

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions to the page Draft:Digital Shadow, but for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition was deleted under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text—which means allowing other people to modify it—then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later, and the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License." You may also e-mail or mail the Foundation to release the content. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more.

While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here. You can also leave a message on my talk page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:48, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

To expand a bit for the situation here, you are clearly one of the authors of Cargo’s Digital Shadow: A blueprint to enable a cargo centric information architecture. That does not mean you can post that content here. The issues involved, as with many in copyright, can be slippery for people unfamiliar (and I think you did nothing intentionally wrong here) so bear with me. We can only use non-free copyrighted content if the owners, release it for all purposes, i.e., to the world, under a free copyright license compatible compatible with the free licenses our content bears (or into the public domain).

We cannot use non-free copyrighted material simply with a single purpose license of permission for our use here while the owner(s) retain the non-free copyright – the release must be to the world, so that our end users can take the content and re-use it under the free copyright license we tell them our content is under (which includes even commercial re-use). Here, even though you are one of the authors of the content, I don't imagine you are willing to release your copyright are you? And even if you were, it would have to be a release from all of the owners (so, your co-authors as well).

Please note that often people who do take the time of providing a proper release find out later the material was unsuitable anyway, for other reasons. I have not studied the material to determine whether that would be the case here. In any event, some of the methods for providing a proper release are set out at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. By the way, I have also removed this copyrighted material from Digital shadow. This does not mean you could not necessarily create a proper article on this topic, and even cite your own material as part of that article as a reference for it, but it would have to be in your own [new] words. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:15, 13 December 2014 (UTC)