User talk:Space chinedu

July 2020

Hello, I'm Wtmitchell. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Fish preservation—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 17:37, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Space chinedu, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Groundwater did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need personal help ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Tacyarg (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

July 2020

Hello, I'm Tacyarg. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Pearl, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please have a look at the links above about referencing. Best wishes. Tacyarg (talk) 18:39, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reversion

In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.S Philbrick (Talk) 11:34, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020: Do not add copyrighted material to Wikipedia

In this edit, you copied material directly from the source. This is a copyright violation, and Wikipedia strictly forbids such use of sources. Please read WP:COPYVIO to understand what may be added to Wikipedia.--Quisqualis (talk) 05:23, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Space chinedu, and welcome to Wikipedia. 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. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) 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.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
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 the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
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 in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

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. --Quisqualis (talk) 05:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia. DMacks (talk) 08:13, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry I am new to this and I don't know what is right for editing in Wikipedia. Some of them that we're copyrighted we're not intentional. To stop adding wrong information I will stop editing on Wikipedia. Space chinedu (talk) 08:57, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe I will just be more careful Space chinedu (talk) 15:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Space chinedu! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, References, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without evidence of permission. Please take this opportunity to ensure that you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Vsmith (talk) 13:26, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Space chinedu (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

It was an accident. I didn't know that the website Britannica encyclopedia was copyrighted. I will not post any copyrighted information again instead I'll source information from a website that is not copyrighted. Sorry for the trouble I have caused. I hope you will free me to edit honestly Space chinedu (talk) 13:55, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

In order to lift the block, we need to be certain that you understand how copyright works on Wikipedia. To allow the reviewing administrator to assess your understanding, please respond to the following questions in your next unblock appeal, explaining in your own words:

What is copyright?
How is Wikipedia licenced?
Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia?
Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?
How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?

Your answers will enable us to establish whether or not you should be unblocked. Yamla (talk) 14:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your answers for how you'd avoid violating copyright did themselves violate copyright. As such, I have revoked your talk page access. --Yamla (talk) 15:09, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. If the block is a CheckUser or Oversight block, was made by the Arbitration Committee or to enforce an arbitration decision (arbitration enforcement), or is unsuitable for public discussion, you should appeal to the Arbitration Committee.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

September 2020

While talk page access was blocked, Space chinedu posted three unblock requests to UTRS. In my opinion the latest of those requests shows a better understanding of copyright than were shown either on this page or in earlier UTRS unblock requests. I am therefoe inclined to consider lifting the block to give Space chinedu another chance, on the understanding that any more similar problems would lead to the block being restored. However, I think it more helpful if an unblock request is posted here, so that it's available for assessment and comment by other administrators. I have therefore restored Space chinedu's talk page access, and invited them to post a new unblock request here. JBW (talk) 19:50, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much JBW. As I said earlier in my unblock request I'm sorry for the trouble I have caused you. I have learned about copyright. Over the past months I have reflected about what I did. I have learned all about copyright so that I can come back to give a better unblock request. Even though my unlock request was denied two times I didn't give up. I am sure if you unblock me you will not regret it. Because I have learned from editing other Wikipedia's why copyright is not allowed. I know that it is because Wikipedia's license allows anyone to use the information for any reason which will lead to any copyrighted work to be used for any reason. Here are the answers to the questions on my talk page: 1. Copyright is a type of intellectual property that is applied to information created by the copyright holder to stop other from using the information as they please 2. A Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported 3. Copyrighted information is not allowed on Wikipedia because it is not compatible with the license on Wikipedia 4. We can use copyrighted content when we have gotten permission to use it 5. I will only copy content from the public domain. Thank you for your time reading this unblock request and I hope you will reconsider and unblock me because I will love to edit on Wikipedia again. Space chinedu (talk) 14:34, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia and the edit-a-thon on SDGs in September 2020

Hi,

I am EMsmile, and I am a part of a group of people wishing to improve SDG-related articles on Wikipedia. We are organising this online SDG edit-a-thon during Global Goals Week, 18-26 September 2020. Please take part in it! If you have any questions about this work, please feel free to ask your question on the event's talk page here. The event page itself is here.

Here are some pages about Wikipedia editing that you might find helpful:

Please sign your name using four tildes (~~~~) when you post on talk pages. This will automatically produce your username and the date. Look for the "tilde" character on your keyboard; for example on English keyboards it is to the left of the "enter" key (accessible with the "alt gr" key).- EMsmile (talk) 11:44, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Space chinedu (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Thank you very much JBW for letting me write another unblock request on my talk page. As I said earlier in my unblock request I'm sorry for the trouble I have caused you. I have learned about copyright. Over the past months I have reflected about what I did. I have learned all about copyright so that I can come back to give a better unblock request. Even though my unlock request was denied two times I didn't give up. I am sure if you unblock me you will not regret it. Because I have learned from editing other Wikipedia's why copyright is not allowed. I know that it is because Wikipedia's license allows anyone to use the information for any reason which will lead to any copyrighted work to be used for any reason. Here are the answers to the questions on my talk page: 1. Copyright is a type of intellectual property that is applied to information created by the copyright holder to stop other from using the information as they please 2. A Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported 3. Copyrighted information is not allowed on Wikipedia because it is not compatible with the license on Wikipedia 4. We can use copyrighted content when we have gotten permission to use it 5. I will only copy content from the public domain. Thank you for your time reading this unblock request and I hope you will reconsider and unblock me because I will love to edit on Wikipedia again. Space chinedu (talk) 15:11, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Although very stale, they hit the high notes and there's been no objection from the blocking admin. Yamla (talk) 21:41, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have only just found this request, which was posted as an ordinary talk page message, not using an unblock request template. An unblock request needs to use the proper template, as otherwise the request isn't added to the list of unblock requests, and administrators are very likely to simply not see that there is an unblock request. I am reformatting your request for you, using the unblock request template.

@Vsmith: You made the original blocked on this account. Do you have any opinion about the unblock request? See also my comments above in the section "September 2020". JBW (talk) 17:16, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Science

Hello! I see you made an edit to Talk:Hydrogen, but I wanted to ask if you liked or are interested in science. KirkburnFandom (talk) 19:36, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I love all branches of science from anatomy to zoology Space chinedu (talk) 19:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good then. You can keep going! Happy editing! KirkburnFandom (talk) 23:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fish preservation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ICAR. Such links are 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) 06:23, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copying licensed material requires attribution

Hi. I see in a recent addition to Stigmatopota harastii you included material from a webpage that is available under a compatible Creative Commons Licence. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. It's also required under the terms of the license. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa (talk) 12:50, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see on Cork (material) you attempted to add attribution for a compatibly licensed journal article. However, adding the url for the article as your edit summary is not how it is done. The attribution needs to be added directly into the article and the article itself added as a citation. see this edit for how I corrected what you did. Here is another example that only shows the attribution.

Also note that I removed the medical information that you added about cork. We have really strict rules about medical information on Wikipedia, and this did not meet our sourcing requirements. Please see WP:MEDRS for more information regarding medical editing and sourcing.— Diannaa (talk) 16:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 15

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cork (material), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Age.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:12, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for an excellent contribution

Thank you very much Space chinedu for this excellent contribution to aquaculture – very much to the point, impeccably referenced, and without a trace of copyright issues. Keep that up, and you will have become one of Wikipedia's better editors. — Epipelagic (talk) 09:19, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment Space chinedu (talk) 10:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Epipelagic: one reason it might be seen as well-written is because it matches doi:10.1100/2012/389623, an article published in a journal. DMacks (talk) 04:21, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May 2021

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Amino acid. You have already been blocked for copyright violation, and you were unblocked on the promise that you understood the problem and would not repeat it. Then your edits again violated that sort of policy and were warned about it. And now you are merely copy-pasting again, with content that often seems a poor fit for our articles. I doubt we would accept an unblock request again after so many problems. While I recognize what you did recently is in accord with advice you were previously given (User:Diannaa is well known for their expertise in content licensing), the content itself is of dubious editorial value (see my comments in the history of amino acid). Lastly, The Scientific World Journal does not sound like a highly reputable source. How about trying to write content yourself? Paraphrase and cite? Nothing in what you copy-pasted has any special words, and we see above that you already fooled one long-term editor into believing the words you copied were actually your own (copvio spirit, even if at the letter of the policy). DMacks (talk) 04:17, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have immediately resumed your violations of WP:COPYRIGHT. As such, I have blocked you indefinitely. In this case, I caught you copying content for Anthene rhoko from here and here. The latter, at least, is provided under an incompatible license (in this case, a license which prohibits commercial reuse). --Yamla (talk) 20:37, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am truly sorry for the frequent copyright violation. But it was my fault that it happened because I didn't read all of the terms and conditions of the website so if you do unblock me again I will refrain from copying information from any other website other than from wiki articles Space chinedu (talk) 11:47, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also would you please ask one of the users in wiki project marketing and advertising this question: What do they think would happen if ads never existed Space chinedu (talk) 11:49, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You were very clear, you claimed you "learned all about copyright". Either you were lying then or you are lying now. I'm afraid it's hard to see how anyone could trust you now. --Yamla (talk) 12:19, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well I thought back then that I had gotten it down completely with the checking of the terms and conditions of each website. When I saw that I was waiting I became ever more vigilant. I decided to stop editing for a bit on the English Wikipedia and go to simple Wikipedia where I couldn't do any more harm because I took information from the English Wikipedia when editing there. I decided to come back to editing when I found for the first time that Wikipedia has wiki projects so I dec Space chinedu (talk) 12:43, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for that part I accidentally hit the publish button. As I was saying I decided to create a new article. I had to look all over the internet when I reached the website I was blocked for. I went to the terms and conditions and I immediately saw that the website ensures to give all it's content liscensed as creative Commons. I rushed to create the article with the information on the website but I forgot to read it entirely. After being blocked I went back to find out that the website debated on whether they should allow for commercial use and I deeply regretted my actions. Please unblock me. If you still do believe that I am lying I will not give you or anyone anymore trouble and I will leave editing on English Wikipedia permanently Space chinedu (talk) 12:58, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]