User talk:Gnurk

Speedy deletion of University World News

A tag has been placed on University World News requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. role^player 10:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

July 2023

Your edit to European Training Foundation has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 12:48, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I see now that it has also been marked for notability... These agencies and knowledge about them are important to EU citizens and I think that is a bit of an understatement. They are all linked to from this page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agencies_of_the_European_Union, the notability of which does not seem to be in doubt.

Why is there a page on all US equivalents of the EU agencies whose notability does not seem to be taken in question? Take, for example, the United States Office of Government Ethics?

Public sector agencies should be open to scrutiny by the people they serve. That would seem to me to be a core argument to have them on Wikipedia. Gnurk 15:33, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I am baffled by this message. I wrote the entire text myself. If there is anything matching existing text, it would be the descriptors this agency uses of itself. When I use online plagiarism checkers on this text, they only refer to the match with the Wikipedia text - duh. How on earth did this get flagged? Can you possibly let me know which line or section got flagged? Regards, Ard Gnurk 15:00, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Some of the content is a match for material in this document. You can go to the CopyPatrol report and click on the iThenticate link to view what the detection service found. — Diannaa (talk) 21:05, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to point that out. Although I doubt anyone would or even should claim copyright on public documents of public institutions, this is not the place to argue and taking on the the machine is a lost battle so I rephrased and republished. As you can see on the organisation's talk page, it falls explicitly within the scope of WikiProject European Union, so I think it would be nice not to slash and burn whatever is on the page again if a section of a section causes concern. Gnurk 01:50, 13 July 2023 (UTC)