Talk:The Order of Damaris' Hand

Content From Idon Raiders Page

As a general reminder, the following is at the bottom of every single edit page: Please note that all contributions to Elanthipedia are considered to be released under the Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported (see [[Elanthipedia:Copyrights]] for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. DO NOT SUBMIT COPYRIGHTED WORK WITHOUT PERMISSION! What does this mean? Either the author of the Raider's article had the authority to waive copyright and did so under the submission agreement, or he/she did not and thus broke that agreement. Either way, Elanthipedia is not required to fix this legally. That being said, we, the moderators, do not look kindly upon blatant plagerism or other intellectual property theft, which is what this appears to be. The authors of NaFianna/Damaris' Hand have a week from today (4/11/2009) to respond or have the offending section edited/removed. -Moderator Caraamon Strugr-Makdasi(talk) 07:11, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I do have said rights.. i did waiver... I only asked they change so we dont have to. I've edited ours for the most part so it didnt look identical to this one. However, the parts i refuse to change are parts one of our raiders wrote for our website. Thanks very much xox--IdonsWebmaster 12:07, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Any particular reason you pretty much copied NaFianna? rather than used a redirect and altered NaFianna??
-Glimmereyes 05:11, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I think its funny you are complaining they copied Nafinianana when they actually copied the raiders almost word for word and it still is copied.. please correct this as you've taken direct quotes from our website.. thank you.

Since NaFianna? and Order of Damaris' Hand was just a name change a redirect was the proper way to handle it and my note was a polite way of informing them, not an accusation of plagiarism.

Maybe I'm just missing it, but at this point it's pretty much just the structure of the page rather than the content that's copied from Idon Raiders. Since you feel different on this, please provide examples and we'll look into it.
-Glimmereyes 16:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Since i changed the bulk of ours to look way different since everything was identical i will point out the parts taken from a copyrighted website that you have in fact copied.

YOURS It is the policy of the Order of Damaris' Hand to welcome every guild into the group. However, the Order of Damaris' Hand do not actively recruit Paladins, because their philosophy clashes with the intentions of Order of Damaris' Hand

Stealing skill is not required. The Order of Damaris' Hand believe that a combination of talents is important to the success of any Infiltration assignment. The single most important virtues of an Order of Damaris' Hand are secrecy and a desire to have fun.

RAIDERSIt is the policy of the Raiders to welcome every guild into the group. Stealing skill is not required. The Raiders believe that a combination of talents is important to the success of any invasion force. The single most important virtues of an Idon Raider are gumption and a desire to have fun.

WEBSITE published Nov '08 Stealing skill is not required to compliment a raiding party. As we all know, a combination of talents is important to the success of any invasion force. The single most important virtues of an Idon Raider are gumption and a desire to have fun.

IF you want to see how very much like ours this is and how much was directly copied.. it is possible with wiki to go back to the original versions of the wiki.. like before i changed it all. You will see that right down to the report policy was directly copied then edited.. please fix this.

Just as an aside, if they're copying and pasting from one portion of this wiki to another (i.e. from the raiders article to the nafianna one or this one or whatever), since both edits are licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0, there's nothing wrong with it. Fenance 16:59, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Just because it's legal does not make it right. I've already specified it's legal, but in my opinion as a moderator, it's not right. -Moderator Caraamon Strugr-Makdasi^(talk) 20:32, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

fixed i beleive.

fixed our article. i beleive. nafianna/damaris .. if anything different is needed let me know.

If you choose to just change a few words around I suppose you did. My hopes were that you would simply take your own ideas and run with them. There are many things still on your wiki that were originally on the Raiders which *I* changed on ours. There is a striking resemblance to ours still but I cant object to you at least trying. But simply adding a word here and there.. doesnt mean it was fixed. You only did just that.. added an extra word to the already existing ones. My hope is that if your group is rp'ing an infiltration group that you can at least have original ideas on things. A good portion of your wiki was made on someone elses hard work and talent not in your group. I am not trying to be mean, I am only trying to help your group stand out as a group who can in fact add to the game in a positive way with new and fresh ideas. Not ideas already dabbled in. I hope your day is great and thanks for trying.

If you are satisfied, then this is done. -Moderator Caraamon Strugr-Makdasi^(talk) 22:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Feud with Dametri Section

Since this seems to be an issue, Fenance, could you please move a copy of those logs to a location where a username is not required? -Moderator Caraamon Strugr-Makdasi^(talk) 16:45, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Since there seems to be an issue with this, we'll handle it the same was as happened with the Idon's Raiders. Those who wish that section to be added shall provide proof, and those who are against it likewise. Do not edit the page with regard to that section till a decision has been made. -Moderator Caraamon Strugr-Makdasi^(talk) 04:07, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The logs are on play.net; what part of that requires a username? Not to mention, you can freely register a username anyway (at smellycat). This is pretty stupid that you're removing the proof and evidence, and then claiming there's no proof or evidence. I'm reinserting it. Fenance 15:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

As much as you feel this way, you were told not to edit the page until this is resolved. I'll copy the link over here for those who don't like going through the history for the links.

Smelly-Cat Play.net
-Glimmereyes 15:37, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Caraamon said "Those that wish that section to be aded shall provide proof". Proof was there right from the beginning. What's the problem here? Fenance 21:32, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Right now? You were told post your proof on the Discussion page, not the main page. Previously, ya'll couldn't settle this amongst yourselves and forced the mods to step in, and we'd rather hear from both sides before coming to a decision.

As for the problem with the location of the logs, some people don't want to create accounts and give out e-mail address if they don't have to. Forcing people to create an account also puts a burden on the Forum it's being hosted on. The admins of Smelly-Cat may not mind lots of rarely used accounts being created, but it's still a practice that should be avoided.
-Glimmereyes 00:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't want to give out an email address to register? Use a spam-free email service. Gmail, or if you don't want to set that up, spamfree24.org is a throwaway, no registration required. Not to mention, the discussion is on the play.net forums, which presumably we all have access to anyways. It's improper to say "provide evidence" but then say "But I don't want to go through the trouble to register to see it". If people don't want to do so, that's their prerogative. It does not, however, mean that the evidence isn't there. It just means the people are too lazy to take the extra step to see it. Fenance 01:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

For the duration of the issue, the log from Smelly Cat can be found at Feud With Dametri Log. -Moderator Caraamon Strugr-Makdasi^(talk) 02:04, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

That reminds me; is there a namespace for Logs?Fenance 01:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

There will likely be one set up once we solve some of these semantik wiki problems. -Moderator Caraamon Makdasi^(talk) 01:56, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Caraamon, as you may or may not know, I'm involved with several mediawiki developers, including one that is familiar with Semantic Wiki. If you'd like, I can put you in touch. Shoot me an email if you'd like to know more. Fenance 04:49, 16 May 2009 (UTC)