User talk:Alleged editor

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Welcome!

Hi Alleged editor! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

Regarding the word, "addicted," I agree with you and you may remove it from the list of back-formation words. I do not recall making that inclusion and certainly would not make it now.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Fuzheado | Talk 04:44, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Information icon Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Relative clause] into German sentence structure. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa (talk) 13:50, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject
.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Control copyright icon Hello Alleged editor! Your additions to

suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism
issues.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 14:13, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your edit summary here. If you don't know what constitutes a violation of our copyright policy, you need to stop editing immediately and find out. Prose you find online is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the

copyright policy of this website to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. The Wikipedia copyright policy and its application are complex matters, and you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policy. There's a simplified version of our copyright rules at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. — Diannaa (talk) 14:57, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Please also have a look at Wikipedia:Close_paraphrasing. Many of your recent edits added material from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy either verbatim or in close paraphrases. In close paraphrasing, only superficial changes are made to the original text. This can still constitute a copyright violation. Phlsph7 (talk) 04:17, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]