Talk:Ulva

In the current revision it is not clear what the relevance of the reference to Tales of a Grandfather is. Also, is the 2nd line of the Lord of the Isles extract intentionally off-set? Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 20:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the second line is intentionally offset. Seems to have been a common habit at the time. Don't ask me why, other than making sure that it is not seen to be running on from the first.

ADVENTURES OF ALLAN-A-SOP. which is taken from Tales of a Grandfather. You can read the story at the link, it's not too long, but long enough not to be quoted here! --MacRusgail 18:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

There is an interesting link here. I wonder if this article is from a book which is out of copyright... --MacRusgail 18:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

I can't get into the comments section to remove some of my earlier comments which no longer apply.--MacRusgail (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Anyway, I hope this is a good example of what can be done for articles on islands of fairly small (but not tiny) size. --MacRusgail (talk) 15:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Excellent stuff indeed. I can't get into edit the comments either and they aren't showing up on the Assessment list either. Suggest reporting it as a bug at the village pump. Ben MacDui^Talk/Walk 15:58, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I got to it. Might be worth remembering. Talk:Ulva/Comments - /Comments seems to get in there. --MacRusgail (talk) 16:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC) p.s. I hope you can muster some people for the Yell article. I didn't do much on the Islands of the Clyde due to my break, but the Yell article was pants. Have improved it a wee bit.Reply

Much about Clark, but surely it is known when (what year, sometime in the 1840s?) he bought the island. And also stated that he bought two other islands, but he is not mentioned on the page for either island Hugo999 (talk) 18:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Clark purchased in 1835, which has been added - thanks for pointing this out. No doubt we will get around to updating Gometra and Little Colonsay - you are more than welcome to lend a hand. Ben MacDui 19:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ulva. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20071201095148/http://www.scottishgeology.com/outandabout/classic_sites/locations/mull_staffa.html to http://www.scottishgeology.com/outandabout/classic_sites/locations/mull_staffa.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714131507/http://www.mullmagic.com/ulva.html to http://www.mullmagic.com/ulva.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:51, 4 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Ulva. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071219190946/http://www.ulva.mull.com/geology.htm to http://www.ulva.mull.com/geology.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071107063242/http://giantcrystals.strahlen.org/europe/basalt.htm to http://giantcrystals.strahlen.org/europe/basalt.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120207134620/http://www.mull.zynet.co.uk/nature/geology_mull_advanced.htm to http://www.mull.zynet.co.uk/nature/geology_mull_advanced.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071112115559/http://albanach.org/macquarrie/book.html to http://albanach.org/macquarrie/book.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070822084444/http://www.ulva.mull.com/history.htm to http://www.ulva.mull.com/history.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071112115559/http://albanach.org/macquarrie/book.html to http://albanach.org/macquarrie/book.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071009025815/http://www.ulva.mull.com/wildlife.htm to http://www.ulva.mull.com/wildlife.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071010092456/http://www.ulva.mull.com/ to http://www.ulva.mull.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:03, 29 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ulva. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070901071129/http://www.lib.mq.edu.au/digital/lema/1787/1787dec.html to http://www.lib.mq.edu.au/digital/lema/1787/1787dec.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

20:04, 20 January 2020‎ Sphilbrick talk contribs‎  57,391 bytes -11,116‎  Reverted good faith edits by Peter K Burian  

@User:Sphilbrick That edit removed the massive update I had made. I do not understand the "copyright issue" you cited. The content I added was fully cited, primarily by news articles from The Guardian and The Scotsman.

I am not a rookie editor on Wikipedia and my background in employment is as a journalist and magazine Editor.

I understand copyright, but I do not understand how deleting every word of a major addition of content was needed for copyright reasons. Peter K Burian (talk) 20:13, 20 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

How is this article relevant: http://paulmclem.weebly.com/ulva.html ... he probably used the same sources as I did. (And I cited sources while he did not.) Again, I ask, what exactly did I add to this article that is a copyright violation?

Also, his article is about History not about the Re-development of the island. And it is an old article since the population was 20 when he wrote it. It has been about 6 people for several years now.

Please revert the section relating to Re-Development. That major section certainly cannot have a copyright issue and is fully cited with newspaper articles. Peter K Burian (talk) 20:18, 20 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Peter K Burian: Adding references is necessary but not a sufficient condition for addition of text. The material added must not match exactly or even closely to material subject to copyright.

One of the edits you made was an 82% match to this site. If you think they are improperly claiming copyright, we can discuss but our first reaction when we find material matching copyrighted material is to remove, then discuss.

It is also our practice, when finding and edit clearly running afoul of copyright policy, to do a rollback, which undoes all consecutive edits by the editor. I've been meaning to write up a short explanation of why this makes sense, but it means that other edits done by you can be reinstituted if you are certainly are not copyright problems. If edit subsequent to the copyright problem are also fine, let's discuss and I can temporarily make them available.

I do see that you are in editor with quite a bit of experience so I confess I was surprised to see what looked to me like a clear copyright violation. Let's discuss.--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:43, 20 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your quick reply. @User:Sphilbrick

The bot found an article that used some of the same content as I did re: History. The difference is, all of my content is fully cited. None of his content is cited. (I have to assume he found the content on the same pages that I did.)

Frankly, the History section of this article is of minor interest. The major interest is in the brand new Re-Development section that I had added.

How about this? Revert all of the content I had added today ... I will then delete ANY content (history of the island) that sounds similar to the content on his page... although mine was fully cited and his was not. I will leave only the content without even a vague hint of any copyright issue. (That would be less complicated than trying to figure out which of my edits to revert, and which to not revert.)

That will achieve the important aspect: A significant update that is of the greatest interest to anyone reading this article. And I guarantee that all of the Re-development section is fully cited; there are a few small quotes and one block quote, but fully cited: from (The Guardian and The Scotsman newspapers for the most part.

If you agree, please Revert your Edit, and I will add a note here as soon as I am finished. (Might take 15 minutes.) Then, the bot will not be able to find any copyright issue.

Cheers, Peter K Burian (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Peter K Burian, I've undone my revert, but I'm still trying to wrap my head around your comment that the source material didn't have citations. That has nothing to do with anything. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:50, 20 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

OK, thanks, @User:Sphilbrick As promised, I have deleted anything that was even similar to the article at http://paulmclem.weebly.com/ulva.html

The point I was trying to make is that I added content xxxxxx to the article, with quotation marks where relevant, and paraphrasing and with citations. After finding it with research.

I had never seen the http://paulmclem.weebly.com/ulva.html article until you mentioned it. He also had xxxxxx content but without citing the source. (He wrote that article years ago.) I have to assume he found it in the same source material I did but I assume he just copied it, without quotation marks or blockquotes.

Bottom Line: The similarity was a coincidence, because we had both independently found the same Isle of Mull article about the history of the island.

Cheers, Peter K Burian (talk) 22:04, 20 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Peter K Burian, That wasn't the issue. this is the problematic edit, which is not in quotes, and not cited. The material you removed was in quotes, and sufficently short, and cited. Feel free to retore it. S Philbrick(Talk) 02:13, 21 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Peter K Burian, Regarding Bottom line, it is not uncommon at all that other websites "borrow" material from other websites without properly attributing it. For that reason, when our copy patrol software identifies an edit that matches some material in some website, it is not uncommon that the website it identifies is not the one you copied from. That doesn't make it okay. S Philbrick(Talk) 02:17, 21 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

CONTENT IN HIS ARTICLE: http://paulmclem.weebly.com/ulva.htmlIn 1835 Francis William Clark bought Ulva. By 1837 the population had grown to 604 people living in sixteen villages whose ruins you can see today. There were shoemakers, square-wrights, boat carpenters, tailors, weavers, blacksmiths, dry-stone masons and two merchants. Clark's high hopes for this thriving community were shattered when the kelp market collapsed and he was left with a great surplus of tenants. Then, the potato blight struck Ulva. Like so many other estates in the West of Scotland, it ceased to be a crofting estate and the sad era of the clearances followed. (No source cited)

CONTENT THAT I ADDED ABOUT HISTORY, CITING MY SOURCES, and quotes: GRANTED, I SHOULD HAVE DONE MORE PARA-PHRASING: Francis William Clark bought the island in 1835. According to the Isle of Mull web site, Ulva was booming as of 1837, with a population of 604 people spread out over the 16 villages. "There were shoemakers, square-wrights, boat carpenters, tailors, weavers, blacksmiths, dry-stone masons and two merchants". After the kelp market collapsed, and especially during the potato blight, Clark realized that the island had no need for so many residents. He decided to evict them from the island.[31][10] MY SOURCE: http://www.isle-of-mull.net/locations/islands-around-mull/ulva/ulva-history/ Peter K Burian (talk) 22:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Peter K Burian, see above, you are addressing the wrong text. My original note linked the edit. I have done so again. S Philbrick(Talk) 02:14, 21 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

The point I was trying to make is that I added content xxxxxx to the article, with quotation marks where relevant, and paraphrasing and with citations.

am very concerned that you don't yet understand our rules. The quotation marks for short passages is critical, and I didn't suggest that that was a problem. Sufficiently paraphrased material is not a problem. You bolded "with citations" as if that is relevant and it is not. Citing copyrighted material does not mean you can copy it without quotation marks (or block quote). I think this whole issue is a miss understanding of the material I found problematic. S Philbrick(Talk) 02:22, 21 January 2020 (UTC)Reply