User talk:Dendodge/Jan 10
|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the|
Fancy doing me a favour and reviewing Interview: PRS, the UK's music royalty collection society? Shouldn't be hard at all and would be much appreciated so it's up for today when UK readers will see it. Thanks! 09:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry; by the time I got this message, it had been published. Dendodge T\C 18:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
You have got to be kidding me
- And we both created a duplicate message. I just mentioned it on your talk page. Dendodge T\C 20:06, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Interesting idea. Actually, I keep a full list of my articles in an offline word processor; the count is at 395 but I think I'm missing a few of my very early articles so I called it an even 400 on IRC - if that helps anything. :-) Tempodivalse [talk] 18:33, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello Dendodge. I feel a little bit unconfortable to make any public statement regarding an event I do not know details about and on top does not occur in a country which laws I am not so much aware of. I apology, but it would probably be better that you ask to an american board member. But thank you for asking ! Anthere (talk)
User:Microchip08 has requested that I leave a comment for you with regards to your newly written Indiana Department of Homeland Security violates Wikipedia copyright. First off, I'd like to thank you for writing the article, as it seems to have gotten virtually no attention over at the Wikipedia Village Pump...amusing as it was.
I came across the pdf after doing a google search for w:ad hominem with the "site" parameter set to gov. I was looking to add more reliable sources to the w:ad hominem article and so I did a "gov" search. (Also as most government sources are in public domain, I would't have to worry about copyright infringement...the irony)It appeared as the 8th result, and so I clicked. In the pdf I found a vocabulary section and thought that I might as well go ahead and source those article with this pdf...
I went ahead and added this as a reference to w:Internment. After the edit has saved, I realized the content of the article and the pdf virtually matched...and so I undid the edit=P. After looking at the pdf again, I found it very strange that there should be a  in internment and yet that 1 was not referenced in the pdf. Looking at the other vocabulary terms within the pdf and their Wikipedia counterparts, they too were identical. I then realized that they must have been copied from Wikipedia...
And so I created a Village pump (miscellaneous) post and then another post on Wikipedia Administrator's notice board to garner some attention. So that's pretty much what happened. I'm interested to see what becomes of this.Smallman12q (talk) 19:54, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you. I hope you don't mind if I quote some of your above post in the article? I'm just waiting for responses from a couple of people I have emailed for statements about this, but I'll publish if they don't respond by tomorrow (since the weekend is out of office hours, it would be unreasonable to expect a response today). Dendodge T\C 20:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
- Not a problem...if you're looking for a bit more irony, they also seem to have copied Wikipedia's entry for counterfeit on page 2 of this pdf: http://www.in.gov/dhs/files/Secret_Service_Role_Play_Exercise.pdf .Smallman12q (talk) 20:15, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
It should be noted, however, that they don't copy all of Wikipedia's definitions...sometimes they like to get creative like the definition for w:indoctrination from Do You Have What It Takes To Be A SEAL? reads "Indoctrination – Training session focusing on the expectations and ways of the Navy SEALs".Smallman12q (talk) 20:48, 31 January 2010 (UTC)