Weesenstein dating love
While a person posting any text to Wikipedia is at the same time agreeing to license that text under a set of free licenses, the terms of those licenses must still be respected by anyone wishing to reuse the text. What happened was someone did a copy paste of the article from June Gloom07's draft to mainspace.
The article being copied from user space to the article namespace without the required attribution to the original author is a blatant copyright violation.Only in death does duty end (talk) , 18 September 2015 (UTC) You are correct that it isn't technically against policy, but it flies in the face of WP: NOBAN and other aspects of WP: UP#OWN.I'm not sure it would be possible, or even desirable, to outright ban such page moves given the licencing conditions, but certainly one should consult with users regarding content in their own user space, and respect their desires concerning it, unless there is very good reason not to, such as when they are employing user pages to retain problematic content that would be unlikely to survive in mainspace. — Maile (talk) , 18 September 2015 (UTC) I'm not clear if you were asking if it will continue to be eligible for DYK beyond the normal seven days because it was moved to mainspace without your agreement?Unbelievably, a slightly similar thing has happened to me again! Perhaps we do need to take other measures, like keeping "score" on who reviews and promotes incorrect hooks.Anyone who makes a habit of it shouldn't be doing it.
So, I'd like to know if the article is still eligible for DYK or not? Belle (talk) , 18 September 2015 (UTC) Technically, the admin who did it wasn't doing a copy from user space. Another admin long ago and far away advised me to create and store my articles off line, and to do anything but minor editing the same way. — Maile (talk) , 18 September 2015 (UTC) The answer is: No one cares who put the article in mainspace except those who want to be noted they have the 'credit' for it (DYK etc).