Davidguam
Welcome edit
|
Do you have any relationship with Stefaan Missinne edit
I ask because I've started a discussion on his work at WP:FTN#Da Vinci Globe and I can't figure out how an image ©Stefaan Missinne can be your own work. Your edits also seem to be almost or perhaps solely about his work. If you do have any relationship - personal, religious, political, academic, legal, or financial you need to read WP:COI and comply with it. Thanks.Doug Weller talk 15:37, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
I've asked for your file to be deleted - and no response to the above edit
It can't be your own work if someone else holds the copyright. And as you haven't responded to my request above, I am considering blocking your account until you do. Please don't let this happen. Doug Weller talk 10:58, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion edit
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 14:32, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
February 2020 edit
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Da Vinci Globe, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. The issues are definitely not fixed. Please replace the tags, you don't understand Wikipedia enough to be removing them. Doug Weller talk 15:57, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Da Vinci Globe edit
Hi David,
As you've noticed some editors are challenging content you have added to Da Vinci Globe, Hunt-Lenox Globe, etc. I would like to point out some discussions that are happening and ask you to join in with comments, or reply here on your talk page:
- Talk:Da Vinci_Globe#NPOV etc
- WP:Fringe theories/Noticeboard#Da Vinci Globe
- WP:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Da Vinci Globe
Wikipedia's core content policies of verifiability and neutral point of view require editors to be wary of self-published sources and to look for independent, third-party sources to support article content. Editing with a conflict of interest is also strongly discouraged and any editors with a potential conflict are asked to follow a few simple suggestions to help maintain neutrality.
Another issue raised is the copyright status of some of you contributions. Much of the text of the Da Vinci Globe article and some images were copied from from Missinne's The Da Vinci Globe. Wikipedia would need a specific copyleft release from the author before including any such content. I really encourage you to read Wikipedia's copyrights policy.
What we really need here are some independent third-party sources which discuss the globe and review Missinne's work. There are some reviews of The Da Vinci Globe which are helpful to a certain extent and if you could point to others available, or any other published work independent of Missinne that would be a great help. As there was some skepticism expressed in the 2013 article in the The Washington Post and elsewhere, we need to ensure the article is accurate and represents a neutral point of view. I encourage you to read the policies linked above and respond here or in one of the other discussions. Thanks. fiveby (talk) 17:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Two more issues edit
Austria gives the title of Professor to schoolteachers. His publishers use it, IMHO, to suggest he is an academic professor. Given his publishers it's not surprising. You need to read the discussions about where he publishes. Using material from his book the way you have is a copyright violation, and even if you convinced Wikipedia that you had the copyright to use his book, it would be WP:PLAGIARISM the way you've used it. Does he realise that anything he allows to be used on Wikipedia can then be copied elsewhere as he's basically relinquished the copyright. You need to check with him about that before you do anything about getting him to authorise it. Doug Weller talk 17:59, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
- As I said I have the right from Prof. Missinne for these entries.
- Prof Missinne got the Professor Title based on his expertise as Globe Collector from the Austrian Federal State as you can see here.
- Published Product reviews here
- Your assessment that The Da Vinci Globe is uniquely based on Professors Missinnes opinion is not objective. There are several written endorsements in addition to the reviews of his research. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidguam (talk • contribs)
- Has Missinne agreed to the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License which allows anyone to publish or copy his work anywhere, or is permission limited to use in these specific Wikipedia articles? –dlthewave ☎ 18:42, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
February 2020 edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Guy (help!) 18:53, 29 February 2020 (UTC)