User talk:Διοτιμα

Welcome!

Hello, Διοτιμα, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 09:02, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Critique of Pure Reason has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 23:29, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 00:45, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The warning above concerns your recent edit summary at Being and Time, visible here. Such behavior will lead to blocks if you persist in it. (Incidentally, I understood the content I removed perfectly well. Labeling it poor writing, which it was, doesn't mean I don't understand it). FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 00:49, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Διοτιμα: The edit summary referenced above and another concerning "effeminate ressentiment penpushig" aren't acceptable ways of replying to other editors. While you're reviewing Wikipedia's civility policy you should spend a little time reading the policy on original research. Wikipedia isn't a place to advance personal views or commentary. Acroterion (talk) 01:32, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. You will find it by following this link Irondome (talk) 01:03, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to The Question Concerning Technology, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 07:24, 24 December 2017 (UTC) Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.[reply]

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to The Question Concerning Technology does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 07:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Critique of Pure Reason

Hello Διοτιμα. Would you please explain your edits to the article Critique of Pure Reason at the article's talk page? Since you wish to alter the article's lead, it is up to you to gain consensus for your changes. Failing that, they will be removed. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:00, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. Since you have continued the same edits at the article, I again request that you discuss them at its talk page. This is the normal way of resolving disputes on Wikipedia. A discussion would make it possible for a third opinion to be requested if necessary; see WP:3O. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 19:57, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 10:10, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:IBID

Hello. Please stop using ibid. on Wikipedia as you did here. Cheers. --Omnipaedista (talk) 18:42, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Talk:The Phenomenology of Spirit, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 13:31, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Introduction to Metaphysics (Heidegger)‎ has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 03:01, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Introduction to Metaphysics (Heidegger) does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 22:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

I noticed your recent edit to Introduction to Metaphysics (Heidegger) does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 05:46, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Introduction to Metaphysics (Heidegger) has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:19, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In explanation of the above notice: although you used the edit summary "expanded lead, as per WP:LEAD", it is clear that your edit did not, in any meaningful way, expand the lead. Rather you removed some existing content and made changes of meaning without explanation. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:19, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the page Introduction to Metaphysics (Heidegger)‎ has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. The summaries are helpful to people browsing an article's history, so it is important that you use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did. Feel free to use the sandbox to make test edits. Thank you. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 23:34, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In explanation of the above note: please stop using the edit summary "expanded lead, as per WP:LEAD" to describe the change you made here. It does not expand the lead. Thank you. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 23:34, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of No Original Research Noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 00:06, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Introduction to Metaphysics (Heidegger). Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 00:06, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus reference dates

At The Phenomenology of Spirit you added the following entries to the "References" section:

G. W. Hegel (1979). Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit
G. W. Hegel (2015). Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: The Science of Logic

Hegel died in 1831. The Phenomenology of Spirit was published in 1807, not 1979, and The Science of Logic in 1812–1816, not 2015. Did you actually cite translations? If so, which ones? Hairy Dude (talk) 16:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]