User talk:Anthere
For previous conversations, see User talk:Anthere/Archives or User talk:Anthere/Archives 2021
Disambiguation link notification for May 18[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited World Intellectual Property Organization, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Intellectual Property Office.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:05, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Vandalism Report[edit]
A user called RockabillyRaccoon has been vandalizing the templates for Hip hop and Rap rock. Could you put an end to this? 2600:6C5A:417F:794E:E400:4C15:61F0:5374 (talk) 22:22, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- I do not see anything wrong. Where ? Anthere (talk) 22:29, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- The user states that Rap metal and Punk rap aren't subgenres of rap rock.2600:6C5A:417F:794E:E400:4C15:61F0:5374 (talk) 00:10, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
Well,
- I know nothing about rap metal and punk rap. Zero. So I do not see how my input here would be useful
- I do not think you should call an editor you disagree with «a vandal ». This user may be right or wrong, or anything in between, but his track record does not immediately spring to my mind as being the track record of a vandal. So please mind the words. You may disagree... that does not make him a vandal. A vandal is not someone you disagree with, a vandal is here to voluntarily damage the encyclopedia
- You have zero track record yourself. Any reason to trust you over him ?
- I advise that... if you disagree with him... you go talk to him on his talk page beyond what has already been done
- You may also discuss that on the talk page of the said articles to try to gather input from other knowledgeable people
- Or take it to discussion to Wikipedia:WikiProject Hip hop (I have not looked if that project was still active though)
- Or you may look for the active biggest content contributors to the said articles and invite them to give their opinion on the matter
In any cases, a person you simply disagree with, is not a vandal. Be nice :) Anthere (talk) 10:12, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 14[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Graphite, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battery.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia and copyright[edit]
Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you have added Creative Commons licensed text to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Collective rights management. You are welcome to import appropriate Creative Commons licensed content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Compatibly licensed sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any Creative Commons content you have already imported is fully attributed. For example, you can add the {{CC-notice}} template to the end of <ref></ref> tags for sources where you are copying from Creative Commons-licensed sources. Thank you! — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:35, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Noted. Usually I do so when text is rather large. Otherwise not. I must clearly have forgotten yesterday. Sorry about that. Anthere (talk) 21:25, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
2024[edit]
Marinna (talk) 20:46, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Precious anniversary[edit]
 | |
| Three years! |
|---|
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty-copyright rational requested[edit]
What is your reason for stating that the content is compatibly licensed? Looking at the legal page, it seems that only content published after Nov. 2016 is automatically CC BY 4-ed. Prior content seems to be treated on a case-by-case basis. Do you have anything that explicitly releases that page under a compatible license?
- Only very old usecases or archived discussions remain on the WIPO website that might be prior to 2017. The very very big majority of the content is post 2017. The treaties summary pages I work with were all reworked end of 2023 when they did a major rehaul of the website. This major update of the website broke many url of pages by the way, links I am slowly fixing one by one because they failed to maintain relationship between some old urls and new urls.
- Incidently, I also contacted a few months ago the WIPO legal office to ask them about the exact copyright status of the old treaties and texts, after Wikisource editors asked me to inquire (so that they could put the old treaties on wiki source). I got the answer that « all the content published on the website was to be considered CC BY 4.0, unless otherwise tagged ». Yes... even those prior to 2016... (which seems very odd... I know)
- About « how do I prove that pages I work on are post 2016 »... errr... well, I am personally sure because those pages basically did not existed as-is last year [1]. I am also sure because the website was entirely updated in 2023. And I am sure because the content of those pages is very up to date (definitely not 10 years old -). And they published statements about the work they did to clean up and complement all treaty pages [2]. Anthere (talk) 22:45, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Also, I'm wondering about your message to Red Tailed Hawk on 2023-12-05, where you apparently explained that you don't always attribute CC BY 4 content. As I'm sure you're aware, that attribution isn't optional. Failure to add it does, in fact, constitute a copyright violation. Could you clarify your statement? GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- When it is a sentence such as « The treaty entered into force on August 19, 1980 »; even if I might have technically copy pasted it, I believe the sentence is too short and not creative enough that it deserves attribution. So no... I will add a source for the information, but I do not add an attribution tag for such as short and bland statement. I only add attributions when it is more specific and long. Anthere (talk) 22:41, 6 June 2024 (UTC)