User talk:Arlen22

Welcome to Wikibooks, Arlen22!

First steps tutorial

Wikibooks is for freely-licensed collaboratively-developed textbooks.
You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold contributing and assume good faith about the intentions of others. Remember, this is a wiki, so you're allowed to change just about anything, and changes can be made easily. Come introduce yourself to everyone, and let us know what interests you.

If you're coming here from other Wikimedia projects, you should read our primer for Wikimedians to get quickly up-to-speed.

Getting help

• See the Wikibooks help pages for common issues, or read Using Wikibooks for a more user-friendly introduction to the project.
• Remember, every edit is saved, so if you make mistakes, you can revert to an earlier version if needed.
• Get help from the community in the Reading room or in our IRC channel.
• You cannot upload an image until you have been a member for at least 4 days. If your upload is tagged with {{nld}}, {{bfu}}, or {{nfur}}, please read the template message as it explains the violation of our media policy. Please be sure to provide the required {{information}}: a license tag and source citation are always required; fair use images require a {{fair use rationale}}. Get help in the user assistance room.

Goodies, tips and tricks

• Please fill in the edit summary and preview your edits before saving.
• Sign your name on discussion pages by typing ~~~~
• User scripts can make many tasks easier. Look at the Gadgets tab of my preferences; check off the boxes for the scripts you want, and hit save!

Made a mistake?

• Please make sure you follow our naming policy - modules should be named like Book Title/Chapter Title.
• Need to rename a page? Use the move tab (only become available once your account is 4 days old - until then, ask for help).
• To get a page deleted, add {{delete|your reason for requesting deletion}} to the top of the page.
• If something you wrote was deleted, please read the deletion policy, and check the deletion log to find out why. Also check the VFD archives if applicable. You can request undeletion at WB:VFU, or ask the administrator who deleted the page.

Thanks, Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 15:36, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)

Content from Wikipedia

If you want to use a page from Wikipedia as a basis for a page in a book on Wikibooks, please request that it be imported at Wikibooks:Requests for Import in order to preserve the edit history. This way attribution is given to the original authors and you don't give the appearance that you're trying to claim the content as your own work. I merged w:Messier object into Messier Index for you, but please leave requests on the above page in the future. Thanks. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 15:36, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Did you also add that template requesting expansion? If so, is there a template that states that the book is being currently worked on? Just wondering, I figure it would be more correct. (:Smile:) Arlen22 (talk) 15:50, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

You'd be looking for {{under construction}}. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 01:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Messier Index

I've finished importing the pages you requested for this book. I am curious as to what you're planning to do with them all. What will this be a textbook on? How will you differentiate the pages from those already on Wikipedia? Those are certain questions you have to ask yourself when thinking about the future of that book. Happy editing. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 03:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I am going to summerize them into a guide on Deep Sky Objects. As you can see on the intro, they were found without a telescope (I think). I won't import any more till I see how this one turns out. Arlen22 (talk) 11:16, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Authorship

Hi, I reverted one change you made, since you added yourself to the author's list of a book was inappropriate, please read Wikibooks:Ownership. Any edits you do are kept on the history logs of pages so any work you do on any given project is preserved. Authors (or licensors) must be preserved on that page since they are the ones altering the rights over that work. --Panic (talk) 19:30, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

This has backfired on you, read Wikibooks:Ownership Arlen22 (talk) 10:50, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

How did you get that idea?

Content contributions (you haven't made none to that particular book), aren't all copyrightable. A phrase, a format edit a correction of spelling, deletions, moving around of content don't constitutes relevant creative input. Even if they are nevertheless important contributions they don't provide ownership.

As an example, you can grab complete phrases from other works were you don't own any rights and add them to another work, in this case you also aren't creating nothing by yourself, but you added real content... (This can be done but with extreme moderation, morally you should also include a reference from where you did your coping)

The next thing of relevance is than only those that own the rights can grant them under a license (and defend their own rights), for instance if someone would copy the book and relicense it (or remove the license) only the copyright holder could initiate the necessary legal action.

See also US Copyright Law... --Panic (talk) 18:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

You have no ownership above anyone else. "By saving, you agree to irrevocably release your contribution under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0 and the GFDL. You agree to be credited by re-users, at minimum, through a hyperlink or URL to the page you are contributing to. See the Terms of Use for details." (taken from under the edit box). "If you do not want your writing to be edited and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here. If you did not write this yourself, it must be available under terms consistent with the Terms of Use, and you agree to follow any relevant licensing requirements." (this is under the save button) You cannot copyright it if you put it on wikibooks. Arlen22 (talk) 20:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Ownership does not equate as strict editorial control over the work (at least not as yet in the US, authors have some more control on the rest of the world). More a majority of the work was contributed under only the GFDL even some of the other works used with license were only under the GFDL. Wikimedia hasn't as yet clarified the position on this regard, only authors or Wikimedia as the published (and due the addendum to the last version of the GFDL can change the licenses and not to a dual licenses version). The GFDL and the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0 aren't compatible. --Panic (talk) 23:10, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

"You cannot copyright it if you put it on wikibooks." this is wrong. As I stated above owners of content are only granting a license over their work, not giving away ownership of it. --Panic (talk) 23:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

But you did have a point (not particularly on the dual licensing). Wikimedia has a statement now included on the bottom of every Wikibook page. The GFDL has been dropped (even if contributions can continue to be dual licensed) with no real advantage since works under only the GFDL can't be used, so supporting the GFDL has no advantage. Prior to this new alteration. (I had started a discussion on the subject on the general discussion area.) --Panic (talk) 23:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I think you are redifining "By saving, you agree to irrevocably release your contribution under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0" Works like this are not copyrighted (repeat 50 times). They are free content. They are copylefted. Arlen22 (talk) 01:36, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

No. All creative works are copyrighted, by international agreement, unless either they fall into the public domain or their copyright is explicitly disclaimed. The GFDL and the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License are only distribution licenses, the owner grands the rights to use and destribute (under certain circumstances). Ownership of content is preserved, hence the clauses each license has to list authors (or copyright owners) as granting that right away (irrevocably) means once given the author can't remove the right for that content but can still sell or distribute the content under other licenses. The owner can do whatever he likes with his material and he is the only one that can defend his rights over it. --Panic (talk) 01:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Free content (Public domain or similar) is not the same as copyleft, GFDL or CC-ASAL. The last 3 licenses even if similar in spirit aren't even compatible among themselves due to the requirements the owner makes to the user... --Panic (talk) 02:06, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Copyleft is a way of using of the copyright on the program. It doesn't mean abandoning the copyright; in fact, doing so would make copyleft impossible. (From http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/ ).
This is why the GPL (not GFDL) requests that if possible you put the rights in the hand of the Free Software Foundation since only the owner of the right can defend that the work stays free.
Anyway your understanding or viewpoint is not something new or unexpected most people only think about such things when they have made some effort that they wish to be recognized or compensated for. But lets reverse the situation consider that you just have added a huge number of your own creative work lets simplify this as images, ok now if you really did put it on the public domain or similar how would you defend your right to get attribution for those same images (I could just take them and say I had created them, even going to the limits that if no historial existed that you had released it into the public domain, I could even prevent you and others from using it), this has happen... --Panic (talk) 02:20, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

PS: The click-through is just a protection scheme for Wikimedia the publisher (since most of the users are anonymous), it doesn't go much beyond that, it just protects them from legal attacks (contributors and content owners can still get into trouble). --Panic (talk) 02:26, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

In the last several responses, you were right. But, there is no need of an authorship page, since everyone that makes a spelling correction could have copyrighted the page if he didn't release it to CC-by-SA. You're whole concept of wikibooks is wrong. Arlen22 (talk) 11:22, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

It is up to the author to decide if he wants to establish his ownership and clearly state the terms of his contributions. This is supported by the license (GFDL or CC-ASAL) and by the publisher (Wikimedia). This is a requirement if a need arises to defend the execution of the licenses.

The notion that the history logs can serve to determine who contributed content is flawed, it can help but extracting any useful information from them would be very hard. --Panic (talk) 18:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I have decided to establish my ownership. Arlen22 (talk) 21:24, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

It is your right to claim your work as your own, it enables you to protect it (as discussed above), gives you recognition for what you have done and is a requirement if a need arises to change or add to a previous license. As you contribute significative content to a work you should do it. One other aspect is that by making such claim and depending on the rights you then invoke on the work, or because of the content added, an author (or any one that claims ownership of a work) is also liable to legal actions if the claims are false or other rights are infringed.

The problem of the history logs is that not every edit made to a page can be copyrighted, spell checking, reformatting (moving text, deleting or even merging other peoples content isn't adding you own work), it can even become lost as text is moved into other pages and pages are deleted over time. --Panic (talk) 22:39, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

The admins can always see all the logs, even before the page was deleted. Arlen22 (talk) 14:17, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

There is no way to automate all the processing needed to gather useful information from them. Even if the last updates that provide an idea on what was done on that edit action it is mostly useless. Consider reversal, vandalism, moving large bits of text from page to page, spelling and other maintenance edits.

Consider Darklama's edits, I can assure you that on all his edits on the book, his own content shouldn't be above a phrase or two, yet if you examine the book's history logs (especially in pages created around the time he was contributing would give you another idea), doing a similar work from the start in all pages to all contributors would be futile. --Panic (talk) 17:37, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Community consensus essay

I noticed that you made a spelling correction. If you are also reading it, I would be very much interested in any comments corrections or ideas you may have regarding the subject. --Panic (talk) 12:34, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Import request

Your request has been completed. You can find the page at Transwiki:List of Messier objects. -- Adrignola ^{talk contribs} 16:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Restriction of image uploads

Have you been satisfied with the replies enough to change you position or have you any other reason to oppose the change ?
(Please restate you position here, Thanks...) --Panic (talk) 06:31, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Can you please clarify you position

Regarding your vote on the Wikibooks:FlaggedRevs Extension/Unstable proposal, since you don't indicate a revision (and previous positions support other proposal). Can you please clarify you position. Thanks. --Panic (talk) 01:01, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

The process is already a great confusion. I have decontextualized your last posts as to prevent increasing the problem, read my post to you there and see if you disagree with it. I will also try to put some order on the still running proposal on the general discussion forum. The initial vote was premature, it still remains premature, since people are being able to compromise and understand each-others positions. --Panic (talk) 17:39, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I didn't think it was closed, we are still voting and working on it. Arlen22 (talk) 18:46, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Along that line, the proposal has been revised to not restrict the rating of pages at the top level to admins. – Adrignola talk 12:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Colonizing Outer Space

Have you taken a look into Colonizing Outer Space. I did ask you to take a look at it because it seems it could match your interests in astronomy (by your previous contributions). There is a lack of information on the Lagrange points, recent planetary discovery on other solar systems, etc... --Panic (talk) 01:14, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Arlen22 (talk) 02:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

User:Panic2k4/Decision making and Community consensus on Wikibooks

I don't know if already read it but take a look, it covers all my thoughts on the matter and experience gained on Wikibooks (and by examining the other Wikimedia projects) and discussions with other WIkibookains regarding the subject. --Panic (talk) 18:52, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

One thing to remember is that not everyone has to agree. As long as no one is Strongly Opposed to something, it isn't too big of a deal if it is just one person. Arlen22 (talk) 19:06, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

It all depends on the level of recognition granted to the opposing view and the validity of the argument as to permit others the chance express and attempt to gather support for their views. Note also that not all proposal start with a majority support (it doesn't need to be a position of opposition). --Panic (talk) 19:29, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right. Arlen22 (talk) 19:31, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Messier Index

On the Messier numbers the cite notes are not working. --Panic (talk) 21:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Request for permissions

I've now been able to grant your request for the transwiki importer right to perform imports. – Adrignola talk 22:53, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Just to be sure you understood

I'm in no way calling you a troll, I was only making a remarks on the unbalance of actions to suppress (or enhance) one side of the issue and the classification regarding the relevance of participations toward the issues at hand. I'm however being critical of bringing outside event into that discussion at that forum in general. --Panic (talk) 12:14, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Response requested

Arlen, do you think you could respond over here? Thanks. -- Thekohser (talk) 18:43, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Template:User3

The "rights" link is for admins/crats to get to the interface to add/remove rights, not to list the person's current positions. If you wish to have that, it would be best to add another link to the template, not to change the existing one. – Adrignola talk 14:05, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Done. How's that? -Arlen22 (talk) 14:09, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Great. Best of both worlds. – Adrignola talk 15:25, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Origami techniques importation

Hello,

I need this page to be imported for this book. Can you do that for me please? Ftiercel (discuss • contribs) 18:17, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I've done this - in future please put requests on WB:RFI as then any admin or importer can do it for you. Thanks QU ^TalkQu 18:42, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. Here is why I do that. I have followed those links: Wikibooks:Community Portal -> Using Wikibooks -> Using Wikibooks/Deleting, Undeleting, and Importing#Importing. As it talks about Special:Import, I have followed this page and on this page, it suggests to go here. I think Using Wikibooks/Deleting, Undeleting, and Importing#Importing or Special:Import should mention this page, shouldn't it? Ftiercel (discuss • contribs) 18:57, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Added. Ftiercel (discuss • contribs) 18:38, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Updated scripts

Hi Arlen22. I edited your vector.js to update you to the latest version of TemplateScript. You were using a much older version called regex menu framework, so the main difference you'll see is an improved regex editor and cleaner custom scripts. I also updated deprecated functions and made your scripts HTTPS-compatible. Let me know if anything breaks. :) —Pathoschild 18:44:34, 09 August 2015 (UTC)

New book

I see you set up a new book, its book category, and a new subject (for it and several other anticipated books, which seems fair :-). I hope the infrastructure made that a reasonably straightforward process; if you observed any rough edges, I'd be interested to hear so I can think about how to smooth them out. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 21:02, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest. The biggest struggle was finding the WikiProject templates. The book templates seemed fairly straight forward once I figured it out. -Arlen22 (talk) 22:05, 22 December 2016 (UTC)