User talk:Mannlegur

Welcome![edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; however, please remember the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Miguashaia, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless that text is available under a suitable free license. It is almost never okay to copy extensive text out of a book or website and paste it into a Wikipedia article with little or no alteration, though you can clearly and briefly quote copyrighted text in the right circumstances. Content that does not comply with this legal rule must be removed. For more information on this, see:

If you still have questions, there is the Teahouse, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page and someone will be along to answer it shortly. As you get started, you may find the pages below to be helpful.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! S Philbrick (Talk) 17:40, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edit reversion[edit]

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.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. ~~~~ S Philbrick (Talk) 17:40, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Flatworm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cavities. 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) 05:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fossil ranges ... without supporting evidence ... contradicting claims in the articles[edit]

Hi Mannlegur, there is a bit of an issue with the way you are modifying a large number of articles with uncited claims (we'd call those "new" claims in these articles), since at least in some cases the data you are adding to temporal ranges conflict with reliably-cited statements in those articles.

Wikipedia takes the sourcing of data extremely seriously. This is because claims must be Verifiable by other editors to ensure that what is said is correct, and correctly cited. By that token, "new" claims that do not have citations break Wikipedia's verifiability, and hence its trustworthiness to readers.

I do hope you can see that this matters - you are converting consistent, well-cited, but possibly slightly out-of-date articles not into good up-to-date articles, but into inconsistent and inadequately-cited articles. To put it another way, you are decreasing the quality of the articles you edit — in short, you are making them worse, making Wikipedia worse in fact.

So,

1) please stop doing this.

2) please go back to every article you have modified, check the data you have put in the temporal range is consistent with the text of that article, and check it is properly cited. If not, please revert your change, or cite the source that you must have used, in full, and (probably) remove the old source and update the text to be consistent.

3) in future, make sure you don't cause the same issue again.

Many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Chiswick Chap,

thanks for Your comment on my edits. In the future, after my editing, I will leave sources for the original on which I relied.

I have a question. Did I understand correctly what You meant in the article Spiralia?

I wish for your speedy reply.

Best regards,

Mannlegur Mannlegur (talk) 07:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. At a quick inspection, at least you have cited a reliable source. I haven't tried to check the actual data against the source. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should I wait for Your verification or continue to leave sources? Mannlegur (talk) 08:11, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]