Misplaced Pages

User talk:Liuthar

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Liuthar (talk | contribs) at 22:36, 22 January 2014 (→WP:COPYVIO). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:36, 22 January 2014 by Liuthar (talk | contribs) (→WP:COPYVIO)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

That quote

Apologies, I've been busy and it slipped my mind, however I did ask another Administrator who is very clued up on copyvio and she agrees that it is too long. She suggests doing some paraphrase (read WP:Close paraphrase and because of the copyvio (and the fact another editor has reverted you), I'm afraid you'll have to do this. Dougweller (talk) 16:04, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

WP:COPYVIO

Please read this policy. Do not add copyrighted material to Misplaced Pages unless it is a direct quote with attribution. vzaak 22:10, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, as I already said, I actually did change the wording. Read both the WP and the quoted article and find the differences. But if you think you can do a better job without distorting the sense of these important statements, go ahead. But stop deleting without reason and thereby destroying the context! Greetings,--Der Spion (talk) 22:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

This is plagiarism:

  • there was no way that any of the functions including vision, hearing, emotion, memory, language, or logic could possibly have been intact
  • only isolated pockets of deep cortical neurons were still sputtering, yet no broad networks capable of generating anything like what we call “consciousness”

The former is exactly the same as the source, and the latter's only change is "but" to "yet". Do not plagiarize. Final warning. vzaak 22:21, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, is there a better way in your eyes to express all relevant aspects of these two (!) sentences without maundering around endlessly or changing their message? I think, nobody is hurt if you leave the status quo as it is. So please try to relax and think in a more constructive way than constantly accusing with a wagging finger "don't do this" and "don't do that".--Der Spion (talk) 22:36, 22 January 2014 (UTC)