Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Template talk:Backwards copy/Archive 1) (bot |
|||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| minthreadstoarchive=1 |
| minthreadstoarchive=1 |
||
}} |
}} |
||
==We need backwardscopy to handle many sources copying from us== |
|||
Needs to handle at least 10 and than we just keep adding. [[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 21:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC) |
|||
:Away to automate this would be have a bot look for the templates at [[:Category:Wikipedia article talk pages incorporating the backwardscopy template]] and exact the urls from the templates to create a list. -- [[User:PBS|PBS]] ([[User talk:PBS|talk]]) 12:03, 17 December 2014 (UTC) |
|||
::Yes would be good. [[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 02:57, 18 December 2014 (UTC) |
|||
== Clarify documentation and use with caution == |
== Clarify documentation and use with caution == |
||
Revision as of 04:12, 19 March 2019
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Clarify documentation and use with caution
I attempted to clarify the template's documentation. Rather than repeat myself here, I also pointed out some internal contradiction's in <!-- hidden comments -->
in the documentation's text. However, my primary concern is that the documentation does not give sufficient guidance on when to use the template, and when not to. The documentation indicates that the template should be used if the other publication may have copied from Wikipedia; it even says that a variant of this template should be used when the other publication's copying Wikipedia is "confirmed" (boldface in original), which implies that this template should be used when the other publication's copying Wikipedia is not confirmed. To put it bluntly, erroneously failing to tag a copyright violation by Wikipedia because of this template has more serious consequences than erroneously tagging original Wikipedia content as a copyright violation.—Finell 02:34, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Finell, it's not another template, it's a template redirect that summons the same code with a different name. The caution is against labeling unconfirmed instances of copying OR properly attributed copying from Wikipedia as "copyvio" (it is, in fact, a copyright issue to use content from Wikipedia elsewhere without attribution, but people should not be accusing others of copyright infringement without a fair degree of certainty and it isn't a copyright issue if they meet the licensing requirements).
- Wikipedia does not commit copyright violations, because Wikipedia is not a legal entity. :) Copyright infringements on Wikipedia are the responsibility of the individuals who placed them here. The Wikimedia Foundation that manages Wikipedia is not a publisher, but an online service provider and hence responsible only to the degree that it does not conform to OCILLA, including responding to validly formatted DMCA takedowns. I am personally sensitive to the problems of allowing copyright issues to remain anyway, not the least because of potential damage to copyright owners and to downstream reusers of our content.
- All that said, if you think more clarification is useful, I think making specifics explicit here instead of adding hidden comments to the documentation might be a good idea. The documentation for the template has been stable for a long time (and, in fact, I don't see that you actually added any hidden comments at all?). --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:24, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Unclickable "link" in rendered template
Hi Jonesey95, John of Reading, or any (talk page stalker). At Talk:Planned Parenthood, the template renders: Click to show/hide further details., but it is not clickable (it is just plain text). Also, the template will render a show/hide link on other Talk pages I have seen this template used on and all that happens when you click on the show/hide link is that a one-line blank field of nothing opens up. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk}
23:54, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
- I fixed the message, which was confusing, and then I adjusted the template to provide a collapsible section only if
|comments=
was populated. For some (probably historical) reason, the existence of|title2=
was causing the collapsible section to exist, but the template shows up to three sources no matter what, so testing|title2=
didn't make sense (to me). I removed the test for|title2=
from the show/hide setting. Revert me if I did something wrong. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:43, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
"id" parameter
What's the "id" parameter for, and how should it be used? All the examples include "|id=123456789", but there's no explanation of it. TJRC (talk) 23:08, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
- See the section above Template talk:Backwards copy/Archive 1#Version number as parameter. Care to do the honours and document it? -- PBS (talk) 09:38, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Displaying multiple authors
This is an attempt at describing what I am seeing. It looks like an error to me. Please advise if operator error in this case.
Talk:Portland, Oregon has this banner and there was a maintenance flag (green) for author= format. I tried several ways (author1=, 2, ect; vauthor=, and authorlist=) and the template either threw the flag or ignored authors (and date) all together. Attempted with only two as opposed to three with the same results. The current data in the parameter author= is the only way I could determine to display all three at once without it flagging to fix it.
If this causes confusion I apologize, I exhausted what occurred to me as a basic editor to solve the issue and felt it worth pointing out. ---> Darryl.P.Pike (talk) 18:40, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- I just noticed the maintence error is affecting the banner on this article at the bottom, for an example of the issue. ---> Darryl.P.Pike (talk) 18:48, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
- Comparing the example banners in the article here itself, I believe the problem is if you list author2= it wants title2= and this might be linked to vauthor= and authorlist= as well. I did not test this, it is well past my realm of participation at this point. I would also note while I am here: No error flag at the top of the page when in preview that a parameter is being ignored or other problem like most templates I have worked with. Apologies for multiple posts. ---> Darryl.P.Pike (talk) 19:03, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Contradictory instructions on the use of this template
The template documentation says:
- This template name, i.e., {{Backwards copy}}, should be used in preference to the redirect {{Backwardscopyvio}}, unless it has been confirmed that a reverse copyvio has occurred.
This seems to imply that {{Backwards copy} should be used if it hasn't been confirmed that a reverse copyvio has occurred. But Wikipedia:Copyright problems says:
- If you confirm definitely that the content was on Wikipedia first, please consider adding {{backwardscopy}} to the article's talk page with an explanation of how you know.
This seems to imply that {{Backwards copy} shouldn't be used if it hasn't been confirmed that a reverse copyvio has occurred; but it doesn't say what should be done in that case.
This contradiction should be resolved. Joriki (talk) 07:44, 18 March 2019 (UTC)