Wall Street CEO

Welcome!

Hello Wall Street CEO, welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Brookie :) - he's in the building somewhere! ^(Whisper...) 10:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Hedge fund introduction

Hello, Wall Street CEO. I noticed that you have made some big changes to the introduction section of the Hedge fund article. While I do appreciate your interest in the topic, I am concerned that this introduced some inaccuracies and out-of-date information. I have explained this in a note on the Hedge fund discussion page, and I am also inviting other editors to weigh in so we can find a long-term solution. I would like you to be a part of this process, too, if you are interested. Thank you. --Bryant Park Fifth (talk) 13:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio

This edit is a copyright violation (see WP:COPYRIGHT). I said as much in the edit summary but you just reverted and gave no explanation. Are there other cases in which you've followed the source text very closely? If so, those will also need to be cleaned up. Christopher Connor (talk) 23:37, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I assure you that what you're adding is a copyright violation. If you disagree, you can ask for a third opinion (but it will only confirm what I've said). Please read up on the relevant policies here. Christopher Connor (talk) 00:26, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Look, the material you're adding would be helpful to have but it's a copyright violation. You should read up on the policies, and rewrite the stuff from scratch. Christopher Connor (talk) 00:28, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

How much information I can copy from these two books. An Introduction to Investment Banks, Hedge Funds, and Private Equity: The New Paradigm Global private banking and wealth management: the new realities Articles that I've completely rewritten using that books: Investment banking, Wealth management, Family office, Asset management, Principal investing & Proprietary trading (Private equity, Hedge fund). --Wall Street CEO (talk) 10:06, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

From Wikipedia:Copy-paste:

"Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea. Copyrighted text must be attributed and clearly marked as a quote. Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited even if correctly cited."

If you have done more than that, there is a serious problem. For more details, read WP:Copyrights, WP:Close paraphrasing and WP:Plagiarism. Unless you are entirely happy with what you have done, you should either revert these articles to pre-copyright-problem versions, or list them at WP:Copyright problems for others to check.

I will leave the "helpme" for others to see, who may have time actually to check your articles. JohnCD (talk) 11:05, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Serious copyvio issue

OK, we have a big problem here. Christopher Connor is correct - you are violating copyright on a large scale. On the assumption that this is not intentional, the answer to your question "how much information can I copy from..." is NONE. You may not cut and paste ANY text from another source into Wikipedia. In Proprietary trading, the three paragraphs headed Regulations after financial crises are copypasted from the source article, a clear copyright violation. Since you asked the question, I am assuming that all the paragraphs sourced to the book are direct copy as well. I have therefore reverted your addition of this information, please do not re-add it or I will be compelled to block you to protect the encyclopaedia.Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:56, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Read WP:COPYRIGHT. You may quote, using "quotation marks" or blockquote tags, small portions of a source - one or two sentences - in certain circumstances:-

• where the phrasing is particularly good/succinct/telling
• where there is a need for that precise phrase (eg a definition)
• where the quote or the author is notable ("God does not play dice" for example)
• Where there is controversy, and you want to be clear about what Professor Foo actually did say

In such cases, in addition to the quote, you MUST use an inline citation (I see you can use the cite templates, so no problems there) detailing who said it, and where and when it was published.

What you may not do is copypasta three paragraphs - (a) it is too much and (b) you did not indicate in any way that you were directly quoting.

Have you done this everywhere? If so, please go and remove your edits now. The mess can be sorted out later - you'll have to go back and write the content in your own words, but for now the copyright violations MUST come out. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:04, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted articles to pre-copyright-problem versions. I'm quitting Wikipedia.--Wall Street CEO (talk) 08:34, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for taking that action, it is extremely helpful. It is your choice whether or not you continue to edit, but I hope you do stay with us. You made a mistake many people make at the outset, you would be surprised how many people think that if it's on the web, it's OK to copy from it. If you choose to stay, this initial mistake won't be held against you. It is harder work to write things in your own words though, so I understand if the task has become harder than you thought it was, and would take up more time than you have to spare. It's a shame, because you have been prepared to go out and find good sources - a lot of new editors just write in their opinions, or what they remembered from their schooldays or such, and then wonder why they get into trouble for that. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:07, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not native english speaker so it would be too difficult task for me. I dropped out of school only few years ago but I'm eager to read everything on investment banking. --Wall Street CEO (talk) 09:19, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I hope you continue editing. Those sort of articles can sure do with improvement. Christopher Connor (talk) 14:01, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:FT's 125th Anniversary Issue.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:FT's 125th Anniversary Issue.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair 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 fair 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 fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair 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 (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:11, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Investment

Hey there! I just re-launched the WikiProject Investment.

The site has been fully revamped and updated and I would like to invite you the project.

Feel free to check out the project and ping me if you have any questions.

I'd like to invite you to join the Investment WikiProject. There are a lot of Investment related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help get this project off the ground and a few Investment pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks!

Cheers! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 20:49, 22 August 2017 (UTC)