Difference between revisions of "Talk:Psychiatry"
From Conservapedia
(explanation for revert) |
(plagiarism) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
::(3)...editing article by extending its content is not [[trolling]] and cannot be used as rationale for blocking other editor. Such fallacious [[Ipse dixit]] approach would look like the person who suggest it is in the grasp of the [[Göring's syndrome]] causing one to act very anti-democratically. If there are any doubts, the invitation of other editors to share their opinion on subject is more preferred approach IMHO. | ::(3)...editing article by extending its content is not [[trolling]] and cannot be used as rationale for blocking other editor. Such fallacious [[Ipse dixit]] approach would look like the person who suggest it is in the grasp of the [[Göring's syndrome]] causing one to act very anti-democratically. If there are any doubts, the invitation of other editors to share their opinion on subject is more preferred approach IMHO. | ||
:::I hope this sounds to be enough reasonable response, thanx for your understanding. --[[User:AK|AK]] 08:42, 22 December 2013 (EST) | :::I hope this sounds to be enough reasonable response, thanx for your understanding. --[[User:AK|AK]] 08:42, 22 December 2013 (EST) | ||
| + | That is not what you were blocked for - but copy and pasting from a source as you did is plagiarism, but I understand you are a friend of Conservatives, so you can do whatever you want; I'm not reverting you again.--<small>[[User:Iduan|<span style="color: #FFCCCC; background: #660000">I]][[User_talk:Iduan|<span style="color:#CCCCFF; background:#000033">Duan]]</span></span></small> 15:16, 22 December 2013 (EST) | ||
Latest revision as of 20:16, December 22, 2013
Another blank page created by Not Ed Poor. o_0 Kektk 11:42, 7 May 2008 (EDT)
Reverting Iduan
I apologize for any inconvenience, but due to IMHO odd reasoning I had to revert Iduan who provided the following rationale for his edit (actually he reverted my previous one): "(1) get another source 2) don't copy and paste text from a source 3) you're clearly trolling and if you do it again i'll block you, love, iduan)"
- (1)...There is no explanation why another source should be used, after all, the very same source was already used at the main page of CP - hence it sounds strange that there should be anything wrong with it at all. It would be nice if there any objections to specify what they are about.
- (2)...It is not copy and paste, the original information is redistributed where appropriated here, moreover, the original information cannot be twisted and the source is credited, such approach is recognized even by biased Wikipedia, just have a look, for example, at John Hartnett (physicist) article there.
- (3)...editing article by extending its content is not trolling and cannot be used as rationale for blocking other editor. Such fallacious Ipse dixit approach would look like the person who suggest it is in the grasp of the Göring's syndrome causing one to act very anti-democratically. If there are any doubts, the invitation of other editors to share their opinion on subject is more preferred approach IMHO.
- I hope this sounds to be enough reasonable response, thanx for your understanding. --AK 08:42, 22 December 2013 (EST)
That is not what you were blocked for - but copy and pasting from a source as you did is plagiarism, but I understand you are a friend of Conservatives, so you can do whatever you want; I'm not reverting you again.--IDuan 15:16, 22 December 2013 (EST)
