Maqdisi

In 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) 13:36, 1 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi SPhilbrick, I'm new to this so forgive me for any shortcommings. The pdf source is from a governmental institution meant for public consumption. Do I need to find a different source? Thanks! Maqdisi (talk) 14:11, 1 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Sphilbrick, I'm new to this so forgive me for any shortcommings. The pdf source is from a governmental institution meant for public consumption. Do I need to find a different source? Thanks! Maqdisi (talk) 06:19, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Maqdisi, Thanks for responding. It is quite common for many new editors to assume that some documents, such as governmentally created documents or especially press releases are intended for public consumption and therefore eligible for use in Wikipedia articles. That is often not the case. In virtually every case of a press release, they are subject to full copyright. Some people are aware that the US federal government automatically treats publications they produce as public domain and assume that all government documents are therefore eligible for use. That's not the case. In the US, documents created by most state governments (with some rare exceptions) is subject to full copyright. Even some documents appearing on federal government websites subject to full copyright if they are created by third parties and provided to the government without release of copyright. Documents created by governments outside the US need to be examined individually; some may be free to use but most are not. The document you use is specifically identified as subject to full copyright. It is not impossible that a government could arrange for such a publication in the creator add a copyright notice, while the government might treat it as public domain but we need to see such evidence. In the absence of a specific law stating that such materials are public domain, or specific published notification of an appropriate creative Commons license, we make the conservative assumption that the materials are subject to full copyright and cannot be used. S Philbrick(Talk) 12:28, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, Maqdisi. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kromelmboogspruit River, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:01, 28 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

 

Hello, Maqdisi. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Kromelmboogspruit River".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:49, 28 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; however, please remember the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Renewable Energy Independent Power Producer Procurement Programme, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless used with permission. It is almost never okay to copy extensive text out of a book or website and paste it into a Wikipedia article with little or no alteration, though you can clearly and briefly quote copyrighted text in the right circumstances. Content that does not comply with this legal rule must be removed. For more information on this, see:

• Copying text from other sources
• Policy on copyright
• Frequently asked questions on Wikipedia's copyright policy
• Policy and guideline on non-free content

If you still have questions, there is the Teahouse, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page and someone will be along to answer it shortly. As you get started, you may find the pages below to be helpful.

• Introduction
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! — Diannaa (talk) 14:20, 10 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Per WP:REDNOT please don't add links to non-existent categories as you did with Roepera morgsana - the rules are different for categories versus red-linked articles. In particular, be careful around stub categories, just go up the taxonomic tree if need be to find a more general stub category, the stub people don't like small stub categories. Cheers Le Deluge (talk) 14:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

So sorry about that, I'll be sure to keep that in mind. Maqdisi (talk) 16:42, 13 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Your edit to Satyrium coriifolium 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. — Diannaa (talk) 13:15, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

  You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add content to Wikipedia which infringes on copyright, as you did at Integrated Resource Plan in this edit. Pabsoluterince (talk) 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, but what do you mean? That wasn't copied wholesale, I typed it out from the source. Maqdisi (talk) 08:35, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'm also the author of article as I created it, why was the initial paragraph removed? Maqdisi (talk) 08:37, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

The initial paragraph almost word for word copies text from https://www.cliffedekkerhofmeyr.com/en/news/publications/2019/Corporate/energy-alert-22-october-The-Integrated-Resource-Plan-2019-A-promising-future-roadmap-for-generation-capacity-in-South-Africa.html

The second and third paragraphs are not any better. [1] Pabsoluterince (talk) 09:04, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I have attempted to fix the opening sentence. It wasn't word for word, there is only so many ways to say "electricity capacity plan". And also "the Department of Energy gazetted the Integrated Resource Plan 2010-2030 (IRP 2010)". Could you please give pointers in rephrasing? Maqdisi (talk) 09:10, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Take a look at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing; "Editors should generally summarize source material in their own words". You're fighting against copyright policy because by trying to closely match what the sources are saying you will innately produce very similar paragraphs. Instead summarise the important information of the document. That's my suggestion. If you want me to attempt to rephrase certain portions or paragraphs ask me on the talk page and I will. Pabsoluterince (talk) 09:20, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Okay, thank you for that. It seems I have trouble with one other thing, which is stating goals or statistics: "affordable power, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, decreased water use, varied electrical generation sources". This could be in a bullet point form, but it can't be summarised without infringing, as this is the stated goals of the plan. The same goes for "procured a total of 6 422 MW, with 3 876 MW operational and available to the grid. Independent Power Producers have commissioned 1 005 MW" Maqdisi (talk) 09:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

That being said, the first paragraph is now suitable. Pabsoluterince (talk) 09:24, 10 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Maqdisi,

Thank you for creating Buffalo Kloof Protected Environment.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

This article is in need of categories

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Whiteguru}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Whiteguru (talk) 10:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

An article you recently created, Potters Pass Nature Reserve, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DGG ( talk ) 06:52, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello, @DGG, the sources cited are from official South African government documents and data. Could you please give guidance on what else would be required. I've add the article as a stub, so it is lacking in content but what else would be needed? Thank you Maqdisi (talk) 07:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

My role is to help you write an article that nobody will challenge. personally, I have no problems, but there is some current feeling to be very restrictive about articles on geographic topics, and people may think that these references are not fully independent. See if you can find a news or magazine story. DGG ( talk ) 17:45, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gouritz Cluster Biosphere Reserve, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Laingsburg. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 2 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mkhambathi Nature Reserve, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brunia.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you may have added public domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as List of Champion Trees (South Africa). You are welcome to import appropriate public domain 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#Public-domain sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 20:15, 26 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

I have an overlapping field of interest in South African conservation topics. If you need to discuss anything in this topic area or about general Wikipedia policies, I may be able to help. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 06:40, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi Peter, I really appreciate that; if I do have any queries, I'll be sure to ask, thanks Maqdisi (talk) 07:34, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

No problem, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 08:18, 10 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thank you for uploading File:Coat of arms of Gauteng.svg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 11 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:NDP logo South Africa.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Hello Maqdisi! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as List of Champion Trees (South Africa), but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/202208/stateofforestssouthafricareport2018.pdf, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

• Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License (CC BY-SA 3.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:List of Champion Trees (South Africa) and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en wikimedia.org". Make sure they quote the exact page name, List of Champion Trees (South Africa), in their email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en wikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:List of Champion Trees (South Africa). See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:List of Champion Trees (South Africa) with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:List of Champion Trees (South Africa) saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! In the article, source documents are marked as being in the public domain, but I am pretty sure they are not. — Diannaa (talk) 16:05, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi Diannaa, hope you're well. As I stated in the very first version: The Copyright Act, 1978 (as amended), § 12 (8) (a) states "No copyright shall subsist in official texts of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or in official translations of such texts.", therefore parts of this article from which snippets of text was lifted is in the Public Domain within South Africa. The whole table should not have been taken down, as the information was taken from a different source: https://www.dffe.gov.za/sites/default/files/legislations/championtreesofsouthafrica_treesdeclaredprotected.pdf

The only part that could be (but isn't) would be the descriptions of the trees. But other than that, it's information I put in by hand myself. I don't believe this to be a copyright issue. I hope you will get back to me. Thank you. Maqdisi (talk) 16:18, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

I am aware of the terms of the Copyright Act, as I checked here. But I don't think that descriptions of trees are "legislative, administrative or legal" in nature. The table still exists and can be retained without the tree descriptions if that's what the reviewers at WP:CP determine should take place. Alternatively, new descriptions of the trees could be written if the ones in place are determined to be copyright. — Diannaa (talk) 23:53, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Well, I'm no law expert, but the trees are declared by law along with their descriptions:

"NOTICE OF DECLARATION OF PARTICULAR GROUPS OF TREES "CHAMPION TREES" UNDER THE NATIONAL FORESTS ACT, 1998(ACT NO. 84OF1998), AS AMENDED."

"The main objective of the champion trees project is conserving individual trees or group of trees considered to be of national conservation importance as provided for by s12 of the national forests legislation. The Act requires that the Minister must, before making a declaration under section 12-..."

"The Champion Trees Programme and the declaration of a list of protected tree species under the National Forests Act 1998 (Act No. 84 of 1998). are all aimed at conserving genetic resources. The species listed as protected include..."

"Individual Trees and Groups of Trees Declared as Protected Under Section 12 of the National Forests Act of 1998 by the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment 2019"

https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201409/36826gon677.pdf

https://www.dffe.gov.za/sites/default/files/legislations/championtreesofsouthafrica_treesdeclaredprotected.pdf

I could rewrite the descriptions but the descriptions are official and linked to the declaration of each tree; along with its location, size, attributes, etc. Thanks Maqdisi (talk) 03:45, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

I am not going to be the one to decide what to do, as I don't know the answer. It would be better to make your case at the article talk page, or you could post at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2023 March 25. — Diannaa (talk) 11:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Another experienced reviewer has now checked the case and believes it is public domain. So I have removed the template and closed the case. Thanks for your patience. — Diannaa (talk) 14:56, 1 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

I appreciate that, thank you. And also @Whpq, thank you. Maqdisi (talk) 16:44, 1 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

• Just to close the loop on this, I reviewed the copyright issue without any knowledge that this discussion here had taken place. My conclusion is that the material is public domain. Diannaa has already delaisted the article from the Copyright Problems list as resolved being PD. @Maqdisi: Thank you for your patience with this issue. -- Whpq (talk) 15:06, 1 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

Good day,

I hope this message finds you well.

I have recently come across an article (below) concerning the term Limpopo, the explanation has aroused my curiosity with regards to the history of my ancestors.

Could you kindly share with me the source and further information about the Rivombo people.

Sincerely Mr Ribombo

Limpopo River

Vhembe

Limpopo River in Mozambique

The Limpopo River rises in South Africa and flows generally eastward through Mozambique to the Indian Ocean. The term Limpopo is derived from Rivombo (Livombo/Lebombo), a group of Tsonga settlers led by Hosi Rivombo who settled in the mountainous vicinity and named the area after their leader. Ribombo (talk) 13:10, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello Ribombo, I'd love to help you with your query but I haven't found anything like what is said in the snippet in the Limpopo River article. If I do find something, I'll be sure to message you, Maqdisi (talk) 17:08, 4 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:

• File:NLnet Foundation logo.svg

You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete or generic. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact source (such as the web page, or printed document) where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain, search engine, pinboard, aggregator, or the direct/bare URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 06:04, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi Iruka, I just checked the source and it says: https://nlnet.nl/image/logo_nlnet.svg which I thought is exact and is found on the homepage of the article in question. Do you mean I should mark the source as the homepage: https://nlnet.nl? Thanks, Maqdisi (talk) 12:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Yes, you should link to the page on which the image is located, and not to the image itself. — Ирука¹³ 23:10, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I see. I did that now, Thanks, Maqdisi (talk) 03:32, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

@ 5.177.236.47 (talk) 01:29, 19 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

All url binders or a selectors reconfiger phone should I pass 2A00:23C4:9E83:AF01:9C91:7BB9:C23:9FE (talk) 20:04, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I came across one of your editions, namely in Duthie's golden mole, in which you replaced a static distribution map of the species with an interactive one. My concern is that, while the new map has advantages, it implies some further actions by the reader to get clear information, since it's difficult to identify the visible portion of the map as South Africa's southern coast, something that doesn't happen with the static map. So my question is, wouldn't it be better to include the new map without deleting the old one? Regards, Jotamar (talk) 00:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi Jotamar, you are correct in that a static map would show the general location; and normally, I do add both (somehow I removed the static). I've now added it back. Thank you, Maqdisi (talk) 02:33, 21 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~

Hello Maqdisi: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, --Dustfreeworld (talk) 15:52, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Dustfreeworld, thank you for the message, and happy holidays to you too! Maqdisi (talk) 16:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Please could you help get the Hawks logo to display correctly in the Sepedi Hawks article - https://nso.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipekwa_(Afrika_Borwa) Thank you. Regards Phillip. Phillip (talk) 17:26, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Phillip, I'm trying to figure it out myself. But currently, I have no idea. Does the Sepedi Wikipedia have an upload facility? It doesn't seem like it.

Maybe it should be uploaded to WikiCommons under a permissive licence, then all languages can use it. That's what I should have done because The Copyright Act, 1978 (as amended), § 12 (8) (a) states "No copyright shall subsist in official texts of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, or in official translations of such texts, therefore the specifications of this image are in the Public Domain within South Africa."

@Minorax, if you have an advice regarding this, please let us know.

Thank you, Maqdisi (talk) 03:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

nso.wp does not have local uploads enabled, nor does it have any EDP (see m:NFC). Images can only be displayed on the respective wikipedias if they have a local upload or the file is available on Wikimedia Commons. As for the copyright status of the file, if it is in the Public Domain for both the U.S. and its source country, feel free to upload it to Wikimedia Commons with the correct licensing tag. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 04:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Coat of arms of South Africa.svg. 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:

1. 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.
2. 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. Kys5g ^talk! 10:16, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

 

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Citizen Lab logo.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ~~2NumForIce (^speak|_edits) 21:02, 20 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Maqdisi.

I read your latest comment on Talk:Allegations of genocide in the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel, and thank god there are still some sane people on this website. The page is a disgrace. It takes a handful of opinion pieces by journalists and Israeli politicians to create a loosely strung-together argument that Hamas, a violent resistance movement, committed a genocide against Israeli Jews (the group is ill-defined in the article) rather than a terror attack against Israel in general. I've made several points - such as if this article is allowed to stand, we might as well create "Allegations of genocide during 9/11 against al-Qaeda towards Americans", or "Allegations of genocide towards the French in the Charlie Hebdo shooting". The article is riddled with WP:FALSEBALANCE, WP:SYNTHESIS, and WP:NPOV.

Fortunately for us, there are many others who are opposed to the article, spread across its sections. I feel that if we work together, we can see this article deleted, merged, or at the very least, renamed.

I look forward to hearing from you. Dhantegge (talk) 23:16, 1 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Dhantegge: See your talk page, non EC editors are not permitted to do anything in the AI area other than file edit requests at article talk pages, see WP:ARBECR, thank you. Selfstudier (talk) 10:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Maqdisi. Thank you for your work on National Peacekeeping Force. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 07:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@SunDawn: thank you for the review and well wishes. I too hope you and your family have a wonderful and blessed day, Maqdisi (talk) 07:25, 9 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

outline the processes involved in conducting the cost-benefit analysis of both project 41.116.241.176 (talk) 16:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your efforts to contribute to dont be evil. I see two readability issues: 1) relevance is not clear to casual reader (should not need to read whole reference you offer) and 2) improper placing. The concluding sentence should be maintained as this was a readability decision made and confirmed by multiple editors over the years.I have added a new section to (hopefully) better explain the purpose of the section and a way forward for you. Talk:Don't be evil#Adding Criticism I want your edit, but it needs to work with the section as a whole and worded in a way that is clearly focused on the purpose of that section. Scanf (talk) 08:05, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dewlap, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eland.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 6 October 2024 (UTC)Reply