User talk:Bwshen

Welcome

Your recent bold edit has been reverted. Per the bold, revert, discuss cycle, after a bold edit is reverted, the status quo should remain while a discussion is started instead of edit-warring, and the dispute should be resolved before reinstating the edit, after a needed consensus is formed to keep it or an alternate version.--VViking_TalkEdits 12:38, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi VViking:

Thanks for your messages. I am sorry for any inconvenience

since it is new to me to post contents on wikipedia. On the other

hand, I am a senior scientist who has published scientific paper regularly.

Can you let me know what and how I can do to proceed?

Thanks very much.

Best,

-Bowen Bwshen (talk) 13:02, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Bwshen! Your additions to Butterfly effect have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a 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.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

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, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 09:53, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dianna,

Thanks for your reminder. It has been done.

Please let me know if additional information is needed.

Thanks,

Best,

-Bowen Bowen (talk) 22:38, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you have added Creative Commons licensed text to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Chaos theory. You are welcome to import appropriate Creative Commons licensed content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Compatibly licensed sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any Creative Commons content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. I am working on it now. -Bowen Bowen (talk) 21:46, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It has been done. please let me know if additional information is needed.

Thanks very much,

-Bowen

PS: I am the lead author of the cited study. Bowen (talk) 22:37, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to discuss an article...

...you should use the article's talk page William M. Connolley (talk) 09:56, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As discussed in the subsection of "Chaos theory", our view (and analysis) is consistent with that in Lorenz (2008). Please review Lorenz (2008) and our paper (Shen et al. 2022, Encyclopedia) and let me know if you have specific questions and/or concerns. Thanks very much, -Bowen Bowen (talk) 10:01, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, not here; on the article talk page. And see WP:BRD. Also, don't mark contentious reverts as minor please William M. Connolley (talk) 17:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have already provided my analysis. Please be specific before taking an action. Thanks! -Bowen Bowen (talk) 17:25, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My point is simple: we documented analysis and published it in a refereed article. If you have a concern, please be specific. It is no good to remove people's work without a reason. If you could provide a good reason, I am willing to move it the "talk". Here is a record of my publications: https://bwshen.sdsu.edu/shen_publications_all.html Thanks, -Bowen Bowen (talk) 17:33, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop edit warring: see WP:3RR. Citing your record of publications is not relevant here. You made an addition; it was reverted; the next step is talk page discussion, not back-and-forth edit summaries.

Also, are you citing your own research in articles? There may be another problem here. You should review WP:SELFCITE. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:19, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments and information. As discussed, the original idea was from Lorenz (2008) and the addition was first added into "Chaos Theory" on Jan. 30, 2023. The addition here was reverted because WMC believed that it was wrong. However, later, when I asked to provide a specific concern, he replied "no, not here". I am wondering if it is legitimate to ask him to provide a reason. Please let me know. Thanks. Bowen (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bwshen, you can ask for more explanation on the talk page of the article. That is what talk pages are for. That is what WMC meant by "no, not here". Please discuss on the talk page.

I have turned your addition into a hatnote at the top of the history section, which is more in line with the style here on Wikipedia. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:36, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found what you did. I appreciate your efforts and help on this, while I am not sure whether it is the best. Let's wait for comments from other colleagues. Thanks again! Have a good day! Bowen (talk) 18:41, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:An Analogy for Monostability and Multistability Using Skiing and Kayaking.png

Thanks for uploading File:An Analogy for Monostability and Multistability Using Skiing and Kayaking.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:30, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

added Template:Cc-by-4.0/doc. Please let me know if the citation is good. Bowen (talk) 13:38, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

March 2024

Your edit to Edward Norton Lorenz has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 18:43, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I am the author (Shen 2023, IJBC) and re-wrote related discussions for @wikipedia. Before submission, I applied Turnitin to check similarity. The reported similarity between two texts was accepted. Please let me know your specific concerns here. Thanks, Bwshen. Bowen (talk) 19:21, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]