|
Posting this here because I'm not sure about it.
The user Yogi S. - Professional Profile[^] has actual 3 articles and a pending one.
In each of his articles there is at least one link somewhere to his website (not counting the link from his profile). The links are to informational content and related but the website offers commercial services (hosting, domains, etc).
|
|
|
|
|
I'm just curious, if, I provide a comment under approve or report this [article/technical blog/whatever]. Who will see that comment? The author? The protector? Other moderator? The super moderator?
Comment[^]
Bryian Tan
|
|
|
|
|
If that goes where I think it goes then just admins (though 99.9% of the time it's me). This is where you write an additional comment if the report (extremely poor quality, for example) doesn't express enough of what your problem is with the work / individual.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
OK. Good to know. Thanks.
Bryian Tan
|
|
|
|
|
I used the compare program from Compare Two Web Pages or Articles - Copyscape[^] and I noticed that most of the content are about 80-90% identical.
Working With Number – Infinity Adding – Decimal, Precise Float Calculation – Python
Working With Number – Infinity Adding – Decimal, Precise Float Calculation – Java
Working With Number – Infinity Adding – Decimal, Precise Float Calculation – PHP
Working With Number – Infinity Adding – Decimal, Precise Float Calculation – Perl
etc...
Bryian Tan
|
|
|
|
|
Hello Matthias
I try to run your sample in VS2012 , but not succeeded give me error
can you provide new version for your sample and source code
best regard
|
|
|
|
|
You're probably trying to send a message to an author of an article. If that is the case, then try posting the message into the discussion area in the end of the article instead of general forum.
|
|
|
|
|
Article: Create a Bitcoin transaction by hand[^]
During approval I wrote a message explaining what to do and that the article can't be published while the copyrights are unclear.
At least one image seems to be used without having been licensed. It contains a watermark (shutterstock). Shutterstock images must be licensed and require attribution.
[EDIT]
He has replaced the shutterstock image meanwhile. But the copyright for the other images is still unclear.
[/EDIT]
@sean-ewington : Can you please have a look.
At all others approving articles: Please check and read the comments before approving.
[EDIT]
I reviewed my old article forum messages and found some more:
Consume WEBAPI in Angularjs[^]
See my message during approval:
The image "Confused Blond Boy Shrugging Under Question Marks" is not free and requires that you have purchased a license.
If you have licensed it, you must add an attribution line below the image with copyright information and indicate that it is not free.
When not doing so the image would be covered by the article license (CPOL) which would be probably a violation of the license terms.
C#: How the Adapter Design Pattern Can Make Your Life Easier[^]
My comment during approval:
There are two problems with the images in your article.
The images are offsite which does not comply with the CodeProject article rules.
There are no indications for the image sources and copyrights.
While many images can be used free they often require attribution (like linking to the source, mentioning the creator, and specifying the license). So you have to check this for each image in your article. Even when there is no specific license, it is good style to provide some kind of attribution.
The official Wikipedia logo for example is published under the https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/[^] license which requires attribution. You are not allowed to use the image without attribution.
[/EDIT]
modified 1-Nov-16 9:03am.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the report. I've emailed the first guy, my guess is he'll remove those images.
As for the other articles, I've emailed the author about the Wikipedia logo. The other images in both these articles appear to be clip art. I tracked a few of them down to clip art pages. These seem to either be royalty free, or just some variation of "free" and the site didn't even bother to put any kind of page indicating licensing terms.
I would say moving forward not to worry too much about clip art. For as long as I've been here no one has ever come knocking at our door about image attribution or copyright infringement on images. While I wouldn't say no one will ever come, and, of course, it's best to be above board, but I would be surprised to see someone come to our door about images (and I would wager this would be especially true for clip art).
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your feedback Sean.
I will ignore cliparts in the future but still take note of other image types (especially when they contain watermarks).
|
|
|
|
|
<a rel="tag" href="http://www.codeproject.com/">CodeProject</a>
This is (or was) a recommended way to force CP robot to copy blog content from blog to CP. Which is cool, but why this link is not removed after blog submission? Or hidden. I had problem with this in my articles too, but I always put it at the end so it was not spotted as error. Is possible to remove or hide it via CSS i.e.?
It looks strange in the beginning of article like [here]
No more Mister Nice Guy... >: |
|
|
|
|
|
Give it the style="display:none" attribute. CodeProject will still pick it up but your readers won't see it.
The quick brown ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
I was thinking to change it globally not locally to prevent those errors in the future 
No more Mister Nice Guy... >: |
|
|
|
|
|
I see. In any case, this style attribute is the only way to avoid the CodeProject link to show up on the original blog page, so I'd say it makes sense to use it even if a global change system gets developed.
The quick brown ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. Thing is that CP robot (or whatever mechanism copies content of blog posts) removes display:hidden attribute (spam prevention maybe?). So yeah, you have to remember (specifically) to remove this link ones CP article is up.
This is way I added this question.
No more Mister Nice Guy... >: |
|
|
|
|
|
n.podbielski wrote: Thing is that CP robot (or whatever mechanism copies content of blog posts) removes display:hidden attribute (spam prevention maybe?).
Oh, I wasn't aware of that. It didn't happen when my blog posts were published, but perhaps that's something new then since my last post.
The quick brown ProgramFOX jumps right over the Lazy<Dog>.
|
|
|
|
|
Last few weeks a lot of articles, tips, and blog posts have been approved even though they have obvious problems. This is not good for the site and not for authors of the articles. Instead, this for example results in low votes on articles which, when properly written and formatted, could be very good.
In my opinion we, as moderators, should try to both prevent unfinished material from being published and also to guide and inform the authors about the problems. As said, this would benefit us all.
When approving articles that are pending, along with the content, please also check:
- Is the formatting ok. Especially some blogs posts tend to suffer from formatting problems that leave critical parts of the text or code missing
- What have other moderators said. Has someone left a message to the author and what's being said in the message
- Have a look at the Spam and Abuse Watch. Is the article reported for example for plagiarism and so on.
I believe that working together with the fellow authors we achieve high-quality articles from which we can all learn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you hover with mouse over the solution you provided you should see a green link "Improve solution" inside the box containing your answer. Click that and it should let you edit your text.
Just tested with the solution you provided and as far as I can see, seems to work.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your reply Mika.
I know how "Improve" works ... and you are right : it works. I think, I stumbled over the changed design - my mistake ... sorry 
|
|
|
|
|
No worries, glad if everything is fine 
|
|
|
|
|
I want to ask you a question.We have a demand.We want to develop a twain(a virtual twain),in the twain we want to call a twain(a real scanner twain),when the virtual twain
satisfied a new condition，the virtual twain call another twain(a real scanner twain).
Can it be accomplished and actually useful?
|
|
|
|
|
My question is how the "Needs help" reports are handled on pending and published articles.
Are these reports inspected in some way?
Does the author get a feedback about the reports (I never got one but that may be due to missing reports)?
It happens frequently that articles get approved after I (and others according to the displayed count) have reported an article.
In such cases I'm often reporting the published article again because the moderation reports did not count anymore.
But I did not see if there is something happening (maybe because an editor is fixing the article and publishing it without moderation).
BTW:
How about an additional Report option with copyright issues (for images)?
The current handling of reporting those articles as "Format / layout issues" does not prevent articles from being published while a report might do so.
|
|
|
|
|
To my knowledge a "Needs help" report doesn't disappear after an article is approved by the community. So there are two ways this report gets addressed:
a) An editor catches the report before an article is approved and makes the change to the article either while in pending status or in the process of approving it.
b) I go through all reports and eventually come across it and address it.
I think a report for copyright images would be a good idea. In the meantime, please feel free to email me any you spot.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your answer Sean. So you and other editors are handling it.
Quote: To my knowledge a "Needs help" report doesn't disappear after an article is approved by the community.
This might be true but the feedback implies it is not so:
I have reported a pending article for offsite images not being the first one (the report count was greater than one). When reporting the meanwhile approved article later, the report count showed "1". Such happened more than once.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
