Twells981
Recent edit reversion
editIn this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.
I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.
I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:38, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Response to email inquiry
editI see that you sent me an email. My preference is to communicate on your talk page or on the article talk page.
As I noted in my edit summary, the material you added to Todd Novak appears to be material from this site. I don't see any indication on that page that the material is acceptably licensed for use.
Let me know if this doesn't explain the issue, and I will be happy to answer any questions. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:41, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
- Why was the election stuff taken off, though, and one of the committees he serves on I took off was put back on as well. This is also not true about him and should be taken down: Although a Republican, Novak has positioned himself as an "independent voice" and has touted a bipartisan voting record, which is helpful in his liberal-leaning district. Twells981 (talk) 15:06, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
- It is standard practice, whenever a copyright violation is identified, to remove it using a process called rollback. That process undoes all consecutive edits by a single editor. While this process sometimes surprises new editors, our experience shows us that a sequence of consecutive edits by a single editor often includes some edits removing existing material, adding new material, and modifying existing material. It is often the case that teasing out a single edit will leave the article in an inappropriate state, so it is practice to do rollback. We are aware that this unfortunately might undo some otherwise acceptable edits, but you are certainly free to re-add any material that conforms with policy. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
- How can we add a picture of the boss? It won't let us do that either. Twells981 (talk) 18:22, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
- Is it a properly licensed image? It needs to be. S Philbrick(Talk) 00:50, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
- How do you do that. Twells981 (talk) 15:15, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- Is it a properly licensed image? It needs to be. S Philbrick(Talk) 00:50, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
- How can we add a picture of the boss? It won't let us do that either. Twells981 (talk) 18:22, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
- It is standard practice, whenever a copyright violation is identified, to remove it using a process called rollback. That process undoes all consecutive edits by a single editor. While this process sometimes surprises new editors, our experience shows us that a sequence of consecutive edits by a single editor often includes some edits removing existing material, adding new material, and modifying existing material. It is often the case that teasing out a single edit will leave the article in an inappropriate state, so it is practice to do rollback. We are aware that this unfortunately might undo some otherwise acceptable edits, but you are certainly free to re-add any material that conforms with policy. S Philbrick(Talk) 18:03, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Replaceable non-free use File:Todd Novak.jpg
edit
Thanks for uploading File:Todd Novak.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the file description page and add the text
{{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing<your reason>with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable. - On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Ирука13 18:48, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
