User talk:Coren/Archive/2016/January

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Coren. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi, I have left a message on Talk:2016 North Indian Ocean cyclone season regarding a apparent false positive made by CorenSearchBot on the page 2016 North Indian Ocean cyclone season. Could you please review? Thank you. KN2731 (talk) 09:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Never mind, it's been settled. KN2731 (talk) 09:22, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Here CorenSearchBot reported that this page was a duplicate. However, the page it considered to be the source was apparently the very same page (not a different page with the same content). BC108 (talk) 19:03, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

See Joe Biden presidential campaign. MB298 (talk) 05:43, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I have removed the template because it does not apply. Cruks (talk) 18:38, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Foundation is currently running a consultation on the value and planning process of Wikimania, and is open until 18 January 2016. The goals are to (1) build a shared understanding of the value of Wikimania to help guide conference planning and evaluation, and (2) gather broad community input on what new form(s) Wikimania could take (starting in 2018).

After reviewing the consultation, we'd like to hear your feedback on on this survey.

In addition, feel free to share any personal experiences you have had at at a Wikimedia movement conference, including Wikimania. We plan to compile and share back outcomes from this consultation in February.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk), from Community Resources 22:01, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

The website http://deletionpedia.org is a Wikipedia mirror and should be excluded from the bot's searches. Duma Optronics was deleted because this bot flagged it as a copyvio from http://deletionpedia.org/en/Duma_Optronics. This should not happen.--Srleffler (talk) 18:46, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

No, it should not. Deletionpedia is an odd case, in that while its contents are ostensibly compatible, the site itself is a big pile of copyright violations (since the "saved" articles do not retain the history and therefore do not properly attribute the author(s)). And that's before we get into the other problems with contents from that site – so anything that closely resembles a page there is, at the very least, suspect and needs human inspection. — Coren ^(talk) 19:19, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Whatever the status of the material on Deletionpedia is, the material is copied from Wikipedia. When the bot finds a match between text on Wikipedia and Deletionpedia, it has no way to tell whether the material came from there, or whether the material came from Wikipedia and is therefore not a copyvio. Deletionpedia needs to be excluded from the bot's searches because including it will produce false positives, as happened in this case. With the Duma Optronics article, the editor who had written the original article (which was deleted) reposted some of the material he had originally written, and was trying to edit it to fix the problems that caused the article to be deleted. The bot falsely flagged the material this editor had himself written as a copyvio because Deletionpedia had copied and posted it.

By the way, there is no need for mirror sites to preserve the article history. Per Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content, for articles licensed under CC-BY-SA, it's sufficient to provide a hyperlink or URL to the original Wikipedia page. This is also common sense; if a complete page history were required to reuse Wikipedia content, nobody would be able to use that content for anything except another Wiki. That would be contrary to the goals of the project.--Srleffler (talk) 06:03, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

@Srleffler: It's not false positives; it is text copied from an external site that is not known to have a proper license and thus needs human review.

Also, (and possibly more importantly), you misunderstand Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content: it's sufficient to provide a hyperlink or URL to the page because you can peruse the article history there (hence "[...] which provides credit to the authors in a manner equivalent to the credit given on this website"). A copy of a deleted article – by definition – no longer has that credit to point to and pointing to where it used to be (or, where the discussion about deleting it is, which is what Deletopnpedia actually does) cannot possibly serve as attribution. Pretty much by design, basically all the contents of that site is a copyright violation. In fact, that the editor in question being the author of the original text is very specifically not possible to very on that site is perfect illustration of that point.

Tl;dr: that site definitely gets no exception to copyright checks. — Coren ^(talk) 14:18, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps this will make it clearer: editors X and Y write the article 'Foo'. It gets deleted, causing Deletionpedia to keep an improper (because unattributed) copy of it. Someone (perhaps even X or Y) later copies that article back to Wikipedia. That copy is a copyright violation even if the text originally came from Wikipedia and was licensed CC-BY-SA because attribution has been stripped away. This is why the only correct thing to do is to undelete the text here; a copy from there is always suspect. — Coren ^(talk) 14:38, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

I see your point that the material is no longer properly attributed once reposted. It still seems inaccurate and confusing to flag it as a copyvio from Deletionpedia. Material copied back to Wikipedia from a mirror site should be handled the same way as material inappropriately copied from one Wikipedia page to another, and this has nothing to do with whether the mirror site has provided proper attribution. The problem is not the attribution on the mirror site, but the fact that the attribution is lost when the material is copied back to Wikipedia. In the case I mention above, the user who had copied the material was quite confused by the bot's message.--Srleffler (talk) 02:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

I recently submitted History of South Africa an article that in the past has had problems.[1][2]. Searchbot concluded that History of South Africa was a copyright violation of itself, Edward321 (talk) 23:23, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

It has just done the same thing to [3] Furius (talk) 11:21, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't see resemblance in the, now, meager Engineering, Procurement and Construction article and [4] or previous [5]. There aren't many ways to word out EPC ! If you could explain where is the problem ? Reference: User_talk:Robertiki#Engineering_Procurement_Construction and User_talk:Robertiki#Creating_Engineering.2C_Procurement_and_Construction --Robertiki (talk) 05:49, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Apparently. I just found about this by idly checking the page so I don't know if we have some special situation, but I assume the answer is no and we're both screwed at the end of March. What do you think? — Earwig ^talk 06:54, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

@The Earwig:: I'm pretty sure we have no special situation. That said, the reason we use Yahoo BOSS is because – originally – we got free search results from them without breaching their TOS (which couldn't be done with Google who had better search results). Then our volume hit the free limit, so WMF started paying for it. Since we're paying already, we might as well look into what product(s) Google is offering for search, now.

For csbot, at least, switching search engines is insulated to a single function so should be pretty painless once we know what to switch to.  :-) Not sure who to ask at the Foundation nowadays; I'm expecting Luis is the best point of contact – at the very least he'll be able to point us to someone better. — Coren ^(talk) 14:51, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Coren. I'll look more closely into Google soon, but they look fairly expensive (I have no idea what the WMF's budget is for this sort of stuff). Let me know if you figure out anything important! — Earwig ^talk 19:03, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure BOSS prices are/were pretty significant as well; I'm not sure how much it is but I remember "several thousand per year" being mentioned in the past; also, our relationship with Google has evolved since 2007 and it's entirely possible we might be able to convince them to give us a substantial discount (perhaps even gratis). — Coren ^(talk) 02:48, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I created Mathias Albani mostly from s:A Dictionary of Music and Musicians/Albani, Mathias, which is PD-old. Apparently, the http://musicofyesterday.com site has copied the same material, which caused the bot to flag my page. This happened earlier with another page I had created the same way. I don't know if there is any copyrightable material there (the website claims copyright at the bottom, but everything I see at a quick glance is copied from PD materials). Can you add {{Grove1900}} to the list of templates to waive searches? Rigadoun (talk) 22:20, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Sure thing. It'll go live next restart (in the next day or so). — Coren ^(talk) 19:45, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

This happened again just now with Martin-Joseph Adrien. Did I not use the template right? Rigadoun (talk) 23:33, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

The searchbot keeps identifying articles I write as duplications of themselves (e.g. User_talk:Furius#Edfu_South_Pyramid). This is annoying and I wonder if this can be easily fixed or if not, if there is a way that I can opt out of messages from Coren bot. Furius (talk) 14:46, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

This appears to be the same issue as that I reported about Liverpool Borough Council election, 1928, above. I would be nice to get to the bottom of it. BC108 (talk) 14:55, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

• In both cases the bot matched against http://wikipedia.org/... Now, *.wikipedia.org is excluded, but wikipedia.org without a leading hostname was not. I've added that to the exclude as well, and hopefully this will stop these in future. Just shows how quickly we are getting mirrored now: a new article is in search engine caches before the bot can check it! Crow^Caw 18:38, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

• Cheers! Thanks for that! Furius (talk) 23:13, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to say I when I edited the Article "Tiger versus lion," I added details to the fight between Atlas the Barbary lion and the Bengal tiger of Simla, on or before the 25th of January, please check the History of the Edits in that Article. Little did I know that on the 28th of January, a user of the website 'Insidehoop.com' copied my work, and let me show you what I mean:

Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tiger_versus_lion&diff=701563714&oldid=701563536), 25th of January:

"Revision as of 05:49, 25 January 2016 (edit) (undo) Leo1pard (talk | contribs) (→‎Tigers defeating or killing lions) Next edit → Line 11:

In India, towards the end of the 19th Century, the Gaekwad of Baroda arranged a fair fight between a Barbary lion called 'Atlas', from the Atlas Mountains between Algeria and Morocco, and a Bengal tiger from the Indian region of Shimla, both big and hungry, before an audience of thousands, instead of between the Asiatic lion of India, and the tiger, as Asiatic lions were believed to be no match for Bengal tigers. The tiger was more than ten feet long, over four feet at the shoulder, had long teeth and claws, had strong shoulders, and was agile. The lion looked taller at the head than the tiger, and had large legs, mane and paws. Gettysburg Complier commented that "If the tiger was the personification of graceful strength and supple energy, the lion was the embodiment of massive power and adamantine muscle." The tiger crawled forward, crouched flat and calculated the distance for a spring, and then jumped onto Atlas. Atlas rose up on his hind legs, and crashed with the tiger. The two yelled, snarled and rolled over on the ground. They regained their feet and shook to be free. When they parted from the clinch, Atlas swung his right, clawed, paw on the tiger's head, ripping its ears, and scratching off skin. The tiger rolled off, Atlas went to get the tiger, swiping its paw, but the tiger managed to twist away from the paw-swipe, and escaped. Atlas advanced, but the tiger retreated, then jumped into the air, landing on Atlas' back, though it was twenty feet away. At first, Atlas looked disgusted, but then it forced the tiger to the wall of the arena, before the tiger ran, with its head nearly at the ground, towards Atlas' legs. Despite a crash, the tiger's head did not shake, and the two cats rose on their hind legs. For at least three minutes, they exchanged right and left paw swipes. Although the tiger's paw-swipes were faster than those of Atlas, out-numbering Atlas' paw-swipes three-to-one, Atlas' paw swipes had more been heavier, inflicting deeper gashes on the tiger's hide. Both cats injured, they retreated from each other, with blood flowing from their flanks. The tiger retreated to the wall, to hug it, whereas Atlas angrily roared and stood his ground, even though blood was dripping from about twenty wounds. After resting for a few moments, the tiger tried to circle Atlas, with Atlas looking worried, as his rushes did not stop the tiger at first. Then, sensing an opportunity, Atlas charged, but the tiger avoided the charge, and jumped onto Atlas' back again. Their bodies, bloodied and dirtied by the dust, rolled halfway across the arena. Atlas shook himself off the tiger, and delivered right swipes. One of the swipes dealt a blow to the tiger, causing it to stagger and retreat. The tiger sat, studying how effective the previous tussle was. Atlas was mauled, but not yet killed, with two long rips on his back, having deep bites to the shoulder, which bled, and hoarsely panting, with the wind flowing less evidently than those of the tiger. After observing Atlas for a moment, he tried circling Atlas again. Atlas rushed, facing the tiger's claws. After that, the lion, running out of breath, sank to his knees, whereas the tiger, though looking stronger, had its stripes disappear under fast-flowing blood. The tiger sprang onto Atlas, who was staggering, biting Atlas' nose, and then trying to bite Atlas' throat. However, the mane saved Atlas' neck, so the tiger's bite did not suffocate Atlas. Instead, as they wrestled much, the tiger managed to get hair in its mouth, and the hair interfered with the tiger's respiration, so it had to release its hold on Atlas, allowing Atlas to deliver a massive left uppercut, causing the tiger to stumble to about twenty feet away. Although Atlas now looked formidable on his legs, and brave, he could not catch the tiger, and the tiger darted towards him. Atlas used his claws, but missed the tiger, and went over with it. The tiger frantically pawed Atlas' body, using both fore and hind paws, for forty seconds. Then Atlas, in its last effort, threw the tiger off, roared, fell down, and died. As a result, the Gaekwad agreed to pay 37,000 rupees, accepted that the tiger was the "King of the Cat Family," and decided to prepare the tiger for a battle with a Sierra Grizzly bear weighing over 1,500.00 lb (680.39 kilograms), to determine which of these was the "King of Carnivorae." The battle was to happen after the tiger recovered from its wounds given to it by Atlas.^[1][2]"

Insidehoop.com (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12091811&postcount=20):

"Wait here it is;

Quote: At the end of the 19th century, the Gaekwad of Baroda arranged a fair fight between a Barbary lion and a Bengal tiger before an audience of thousands as the Asiatic lions were no match for the Bengal tigers. The Gaekwad favoured the lion, and as a result had to pay 37,000 rupees as the lion was mauled by the tiger.

Quote: In India, towards the end of the 19th Century, the Gaekwad of Baroda arranged a fair fight between a Barbary lion called 'Atlas', from the Atlas Mountains between Algeria and Morocco, and a Bengal tiger from the Indian region of Shimla, both big and hungry, before an audience of thousands, instead of between the Asiatic lion of India, and the tiger, as Asiatic lions were believed to be no match for Bengal tigers.

The tiger was more than ten feet long, over four feet at the shoulder, had long teeth and claws, had strong shoulders, and was agile. The lion looked taller at the head than the tiger, and had large legs, mane and paws. Gettysburg Complier commented that "If the tiger was the personification of graceful strength and supple energy, the lion was the embodiment of massive power and adamantine muscle."

The tiger crawled forward, crouched flat and calculated the distance for a spring, and then jumped onto Atlas. Atlas rose up on his hind legs, and crashed with the tiger. The two yelled, snarled and rolled over on the ground. They regained their feet and shook to be free. When they parted from the clinch, Atlas swung his right, clawed, paw on the tiger's head, ripping its ear, and scratching off skin. The tiger rolled off, Atlas went to get the tiger, swiping its paw, but the tiger managed to twist away from the paw-swipe, and escaped. Atlas advanced, but the tiger retreated, then jumped into the air, landing on Atlas' back, though it was twenty feet away. At first, Atlas looked disgusted, but then it forced the tiger to the wall of the arena, before the tiger ran, with its head nearly at the ground, towards Atlas' legs.

Despite a crash, the tiger's head did not shake, and the two cats rose on their hind legs. For at least three minutes, they exchanged right and left paw swipes. Although the tiger's paw-swipes were faster than those of Atlas, out-numbering Atlas' paw-swipes three-to-one, Atlas' paw swipes had more been heavier, inflicting deeper gashes on the tiger's hide. Both cats injured, they retreated from each other, with blood flowing from their flanks. The tiger retreated to the wall, to hug it, whereas Atlas angrily roared and stood his ground, even though blood was dripping from about twenty wounds. After resting for a few moments, the tiger tried to circle Atlas, with Atlas looking worried, as his rushes did not stop the tiger at first. Then, sensing an opportunity, Atlas charged, but the tiger avoided the charge, and jumped onto Atlas' back again.

Their bodies, bloodied and dirtied by the dust, rolled halfway across the arena. Atlas shook himself off the tiger, and delivered right swipes. One of the swipes dealt a blow to the tiger, causing it to stagger and retreat. The tiger sat, studying how effective the previous tussle was. Atlas was mauled, but not yet killed, with two long rips on his back, having deep bites to the shoulder, which bled, and hoarsely panting, with the wind flowing less evidently than those of the tiger.

After observing Atlas for a moment, he tried circling Atlas again. Atlas rushed, facing the tiger's claws. After that, the lion, running out of breath, sank to his knees, whereas the tiger, though looking stronger, had its stripes disappear under fast-flowing blood. The tiger sprang onto Atlas, who was staggering, biting Atlas' nose, and then trying to bite Atlas' throat. However, the mane saved Atlas' neck, so the tiger's bite did not suffocate Atlas. Instead, as they wrestled much, the tiger managed to get hair in its mouth, and the hair interfered with the tiger's respiration, so it had to release its hold on Atlas, allowing Atlas to deliver a massive left uppercut, causing the tiger to stumble to about twenty feet away. Although Atlas now looked formidable on his legs, and brave, he could not catch the tiger, and the tiger darted towards him.

Atlas used his claws, but missed the tiger, and went over with it. The tiger frantically pawed Atlas' body, using both fore and hind paws, for forty seconds. Then Atlas, in its last effort, threw the tiger off, roared, fell down, and died. As a result, the Gaekwad agreed to pay 37,000 rupees, accepted that the tiger was the "King of the Cat Family," and decided to prepare the tiger for a battle with a Sierra Grizzly bear weighing over 1,500.00 lb (680.39 kilograms), to determine which of these was the "King of Carnivorae." The battle was to happen after the tiger recovered from its wounds given to it by Atlas.[2][9] Last edited by ... : 01-28-2016 at 02:53 AM."

So the user in 'Insidehoop.com' copied my work, before I created the article "Atlas the Barbary lion versus the Bengal tiger of Simla" on the 30th of January. Eventually, I was told about Insidehoop.com, so I mentioned in the talk page that actually, it is my work, and that the user of 'Insidehoop.com' apparently copied my work, and that I did not copy it from Insidehoop.com, so please, do not delete it.

Thank you, Leo1pard (talk) 16:11, 30 January 2016 (UTC)