Jump to content

User talk: Diannaa

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


 Skip to the bottom  ⇩  ·

Talk page archive
Send me no flowers
List


Boxer (armoured fighting vehicle)[edit]

Hello, I note your revision but I've just compared the text of the piece you mention to the text in the Wiki article, and they're different.

Here is the actual text you reference:

The Australian government signed a production agreement with Rheinmetall Defence Australia on 10 April for over 100 Boxer Schwerer Waffenträger Infanterie (sWaTrg Inf) heavy weapon carrier infantry vehicles to export to Germany. The company said in a press release announcing the contract later the same day that it would be Australia's largest foreign military export to Germany. The vehicles are being procured under a government-to-government letter of intent signed by Canberra and Berlin in March. Rheinmetall's Military Vehicle Centre of Excellence (MILVEHCOE) in Redbank, Queensland, will produce the vehicles, with deliveries to the German government planned for 2026–30, the Australian Department of Defence (DoD) said in a press release on 10 April. A Rheinmetall spokesperson told Janes that the first 20 vehicles would be produced in Rheinmetall's Kassel and Unterluess plants in Germany, with deliveries scheduled for 2025. The sWaTrg Inf will replace the Bundeswehr's Wiesel 1 tracked tactical direct fire support weapon carrier and equip the German Army's new medium forces. It will be based on the Australian Army's Boxer Combat Reconnaissance Vehicle (CRV), which is equipped with a reconnaissance mission module, including the two-person digital Lance turret, armed with Rheinmetall's MK30-2 airburst munition (ABM) automatic cannon that is also the main armament of the German Army's Puma infantry fighting vehicle. The sWaTrg Inf will also be armed with the Mehrrollenfähiges leichtes Lenkflugkörper-System (Multirole-capable Light Missile System: MELLS), the Bundeswehr's designation for the Spike LR. The Bundeswehr ordered 123 sWaTrg Inf vehicles from Rheinmetall on 21 March. On 20 March the Bundestag, Germany's parliament, approved the EUR1.95 billion (USD2.1 billion) procurement, plus a EUR746.9 million service and maintenance contract. The Bundeswehr plans to have four medium brigades, including the Franco-German Brigade and one formed with the Netherlands. The brigades will be formed by five sWaTrg Inf and two armoured infantry fighting vehicle (AIFV) battalions, with the latter equipped with the planned Boxer AIFV, which could also be based on Australia's CRV, which is more mature and would therefore require fewer modifications. The sWaTrg Inf uses the rear of the vehicle for ammunition storage, while the AIFV could use it to carry infantry. Rheinmetall CEO Armin Papperger said, “We are integrating the expertise and capabilities of our Australian MILVEHCOE colleagues from our global Rheinmetall network to provide the German Army with the required combat vehicles as quickly as possible. This further deepens defence ties between Australia and Germany and enhances a sustained sovereign defence capability in Australia.” In addition to providing the Bundeswehr with sWaTrg Inf vehicles quickly, building them in Australia reduces pressure on Rheinmetall's German plants, which are busy producing equipment as a result of the war in Ukraine, and will allow them to switch production to other systems when MILVEHCOE starts producing the vehicles. Moreover, enhancing Australia's sustained sovereign defence capability supports the country's military modernisation in the Asia-Pacific, an area in which Germany has also expressed strategic interest.

This is the text from Wiki article.

The Bundeswehr will acquire 123 Schwerer Waffenträger Infanterie (sWaTrg Inf) HWC infantry vehicles between 2025-2023, the sWaTrg Inf based on the Australian Combat Reconnaissance Vehicle (CRV). On 10 April 2024 the Australian government signed the production agreement with Rheinmetall Defence Australia for over 103 Schwerer Waffenträger Infanterie (sWaTrg Inf) HWC infantry vehicles for export to Germany. The vehicles are being procured under a government-to-government letter of intent signed in March. Rheinmetall's Military Vehicle Centre of Excellence (MILVEHCOE) in Queensland, will produce the 103 vehicles, with deliveries to Germany planned for 2026–2030. The first 20 vehicles will be produced in Rheinmetall's Kassel and Unterluess plants in Germany, with deliveries of these scheduled for 2025. The sWaTrg Inf is based on the Lance turret-equipped Australian Combat Reconnaissance Vehicle (CRV), but will additionally be armed with the Mehrrollenfähiges leichtes Lenkflugkörper-System (Multirole-capable Light Missile System: MELLS), the Bundeswehr's designation for the Spike LR. In service the sWaTrg Inf will replace the Bundeswehr's Wiesel 1 tracked tactical direct fire-support weapon carrier and equip the German Army's new medium forces. As of Q2 2024, the sWaTrg Inf vehicle is expected to begin fielding in 2027.

I've reverted your edit, BUT..., if you honestly believe there is a copyright infringement here, please highlight the specifics and I will act on them if need be. SurfaceAgentX2Zero (talk) 14:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was bored so decided to rewrite it anyway. BUT..., please do highlight to me what you think was wrong with it in the first place or we will end up down this road again at some point. Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by SurfaceAgentX2Zero (talk • contribs)

Hello @SurfaceAgentX2Zero: You can view the overlap using Earwig's tool. The new version is better but I would take out the part about the letter of intent and simply state that the Australian government ordered 103 units on 10 April 2024. (It's not very copyright compliant and it's a little too much detail.) — Diannaa (talk) 23:41, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, I like that Earwig thing. I see it even gives a rating which is very useful. I will do some more work on the article today (hopefully) and even though the earwig suggests it's OK, I will tweak the affected a little more. I will see if I can work out how to use earwig going forwards. Thanks. SurfaceAgentX2Zero (talk) 08:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't actually use the rating; I inspect the overlapping text and see if there's any creative content that needs to come out. — Diannaa (talk) 13:33, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You were a bit quick with that Boxer text. I really did intend getting back to it. I just wanted to do a little more research and work on some words that could show the order timeline. I note your comments on detail, but in all honesty in this instance those dates are quite interesting. Anyone with any subject matter knowledge will identify from those dates that this procurement was lightening quick in military terms. Obviously brought about by the situation in Ukraine. Of course, I can't include anything in text that says similar to in a quick procurement process..., as that's an opinion and would likely be picked up as such. So I intended to include some dates and events, so that those in the know could work it out for themselves just how quick this process had been. That was the reason for my delay. Sources also do the usual with this sort of stuff and lazy writers substitute the word contract in place of many things that are not actually a contract, and here we have a Letter of Intent, an order, parliamentary approval, and a production agreement. And in various sources these all get individually labelled as the contract... Anyway, I've come up with a few words, and words that hopefully don't cause issues. I'll insert those later today.
And another query if I may. I don't understand why so much history in the article is now not accessible (black lines) after your revision. It's pretty much all stuff all over the article that's not related to your revision. I might be being dim but I don't see why this happens?
And finally, if you spot anything else in the article you think is an issue, would you consider a quick contact via Talk and when I pick that up I'll deal with it? Just saves deletion and disruption? SurfaceAgentX2Zero (talk) 09:05, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @SurfaceAgentX2Zero and sorry for the delayed reply. Copyright issues are a serious problem with legal considerations, and must be dealt with promptly. It's not an occasional problem: there's anywhere from 75 to 100 potential violations to be assessed each day. Since there's only a very small group of people working on this aspect of copyright cleanup (currently only three!), discussion of each individual violation is not practical, and for clear-cut violations it is not necessary. The revisions containing the copyright material were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that's why you can't access them any more. — Diannaa (talk) 14:00, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, that makes a great deal of sense, and no need to apologise for any delay in the reply. We are all volunteers as such. personally, I will endeavor to be more more careful of copyright moving forwards. I think I will adopt an if in doubt, leave it out policy. Regarding that RD1 though, just one point if I may. The vast majority of the changes hidden from view under criterion RD1 have absolutely no connection with the bit of text that was copyright. It seems wrong to hide these from view, but I di admit, I'm no expert! Is it an auto hide thing, or manual? Either way, as i say, the vast majority, possibly even all of them..., hidden are not connected to the copyright text. They're in different sections of the article, most of them. Look forward to your views. And please, no rush. I'm away for a couple of days now anyway. SurfaceAgentX2Zero (talk) 14:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In order to completely remove the material from the page history, all the intervening edits have to be hidden, from the time of insertion of the copyright material to its removal. This means that in many instances, harmless edits have to be hidden. — Diannaa (talk) 14:39, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 July 2024[edit]

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

93 amendment of Constitution of India[edit]

Hello Diannaa, can u please tell me why was the page Ninety-third Amendment of the Constitution of India was deleted in 2016. I am thinking of creating new article page for 93 constitutional amendment. Nikrocks12345 (talk) 09:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikrocks12345. It was deleted for G5: Created by a banned or blocked user (Mushroom9) in violation of ban or block. So were some of the others that are red-linked at List of amendments of the Constitution of India It's ok to start new versions of these articles if you like. — Diannaa (talk) 11:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kakuda (film)[edit]

Hi Diannaa. Would you mind taking a look at this edit. It's directly copied-and-pasted from the cited website. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:20, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa (talk) 11:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Himmler picture[edit]

Source is sa-kuva/Finna as watermark states, I got the description from Helsinki Times, so it should be fine? https://www.finna.fi/Record/sa-kuva.sa-kuva-37746?sid=4747041667 RKT7789 (talk) 12:24, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks okay now. Thanks. — Diannaa (talk) 16:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possible WP:NEWSPAPER copyvio[edit]

Hello! I would like to ask if you can do an audit of Valenzuela400 (talk · contribs). There have been continuous concerns raised about them over the insertion of possible copyvio items that appear to have been lifted straight off news websites despite previous warnings. See the following edits [1]] and [2] that I reverted for example. Borgenland (talk) 02:55, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Borgenland. If you've got five or more examples of prose violations of the copyright policy, please consider requesting a case be opened. That happens at WP:CP. Thanks. — Diannaa (talk) 13:35, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again Borgenland. Sorry, I made a mistake. The correct place to request a case is at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations. It looks like issues with both photos and prose can be investigated. — Diannaa (talk) 13:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! For transparency, I made this inquiry after one of the users mentioned below, who also happened to be editing in the same WikiProject as the three of us, asked me to confirm as a third party if there were grounds for suspicion, which I did find independently and in good faith. You may find the records of discussions in my talk page for verification. Since they appear to have more knowledge of the case and since I personally do not think the offending user is a WP:NOTHERE, I will also notify the user who asked me about this of these steps. Borgenland (talk) 13:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dianna, good afternoon[edit]

Hi Dianna. First I messaged administrator Túrelio 08:39, 18 February 2024 (UTC) regarding the pains I suffered and am suffering as editor. It started January 21, 2024 by a User who continued following me and I am pained by ad hominem attacks on my persona; the Accusation which terribly painful on 21:42, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I admit my mistake when you messaged me in my talk page, :"I made a mistake for quoting An AllKPop report regarding Limited quotation and Paraphrasing, sincerely yours, Valenzuela400 (talk) 07:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC). Wikipedia and copyright Hello Valenzuela400! Your additions to Park Bo-ram have been removed in whole or part.
Regarding my Manila Bulletin edit, I explained in Manila Bulletin, Controversy or legal issue 2024 why; thereafter, I revisited my edit and revised it, to the best of my ability here New edit; however, I was told that my edit was not yet sufficient; please allow me to explain why I chose to input the essential ingredients of the legal issues on Manila Bulletin; I am a law consultant, had been a Philippine Bar Examinations reviewer; my students - reviewers extensively use Wikipedia articles for research; I advised them to read the links and citation reference of the news, etc. however, Links abd citations die in time except BBC, Press Reader, among others; in my viewm, if all the important details of the alleged crime are input in the edit of the article, then in the future, students reviewers can have access of them even if the links would die and unarchived;
My edit on Mediatrix of All Grace offending religious feelings case may have been too detailed, perhaps, since as Catholic, I am a devotee of the Virgin, but objectively, I edited it to tell the current Pope Francis stance against them; it was revised by Blakegripling ph (talk | contribs) at 23:15, 12 May 2024, and finally by Borgenland; I respectfully grieve, since Wikipedia, I think and still ponder is collaboration; but I am singled and attacked here, my detractors are discarding all my positive contributions, eternally and non-stop following me; does Wikipedia allow this, with all due respect?
Currently, my Contributions include 4,867 edits in Wikipedia extendedconfirmed and 1,290 edits in Commons. The 4,867 edits were all done in good faith, and my contributions did a lot for Wikimedia Foundation; I stay here for our Valenzuela, Metro Manila 400th year one year Festivity, and we are making a coffee table book, hence my editorship here will enhance Philippine tourism; it pains me that One editor continuously followed me digging for mistakes like FOP, non free images, and now, Wiki not newspaper and very sadly Copy Vio. As a pillar or Dean in our Philippine laws, legal expert on these subjects, where I devoted 30 years of my stint, I am too sad to be accused a puppet of whom they continued to accuse Florentino Floro creating puppets here. Historically, Blocked Judgefloro contributed 1,706,705 Registered: 20:46, 29 April 2013 (11 years ago) Total edit count: 1,706,763 Number of attached accounts: 42 - never asked to be unblocked; all its 18 alleged socks were eternally followed and asked to be blocked by only One editor who was allegedly attacked by User:Judgefloro; sad to say this User non-stopped attacked Florentino Floro; now, I am deeply saddened to be singled out by Floro's nemesis.
In fine, I greatly appreciate your hard works, and I leave my fate or say Karma upon your hands, please, I humbly beg, protect me from these who made me feel sad; if I made great mistakes, then please revise them and leave me a note on my page; Mabuhay from Philippines very sincerely yours Valenzuela400 (talk) 07:13, 8 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

Please help me, since I believe you are a fair administrator who created a great legacy on Wikimedia Foundation very sincerely yours

Valenzuela400 (talk) 07:36, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024[edit]

Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Serbianisation, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. You claimed that I violated copywrite laws but failed to show where. You also deleted content unrelated to your claim, including an image that has been on wikipedia for a while and is fully aligned with copywrite rules.

If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you.

Aferditaa (talk) 15:30, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed on their talk page. Floquenbeam (talk) 16:07, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Abortion in Europe

Hi Diannaa, thank you for your message re. copyright. My intention has been to put together a readable and accurate table in the article (similar to what is printed in several encyclopedias or political textbooks comparing different jurisdictions).

I have paraphrased much of the text as the original was, in all honesty, often official and legal language (which most ordinary eaders find a tad strange and distant from everyday life!), and each entry has been referenced using information which is published in public domain.

Given the sensitivity of the issue, and the range of different circumstances across Europe, I've opted for this type of table with brief text points rather than colour-coded options (which I've seen in some articles but unfortunately simplify a sensitive issue rather than let readers see a full summary in one place).

I will give this some more thought but, as with other articles, I've followed the copyright guidelines in line with the source's permission (as far as I'm aware) but I will read more over the coming weeks, and I'm seeking to do my best to write carefully and calmly about an issue that can be very divisive. Thanks again for your time and patience. Gecko177 (talk) 18:28, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The place where I found the matching content is here. It's a document published by International Planned Parenthood Federation. Looking at the document and at their website, I don't see any licensing information or any indication that the material is released into the public domain. (You may be confusing "publicly available" with "public domain".)
Under current copyright law, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright and can't be copied here. — Diannaa (talk) 18:56, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


8th New York Infantry Regiment Copyright issue[edit]

Hi Dianna, please see my response on the copyright issues page. The website cites the public domain source right there on the page. I give specifics in the response. Thanks and take care. Boo Boo (talk) 14:10, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hhfjbaker. I will investigate and fix this when I get back from work. — Diannaa (talk) 14:40, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Diannaa&oldid=1233716764"