User talk:Hagemaruii

Welcome!

Hi Hagemaruii! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Apologies about the warning I gave you earlier. It is better, if you can, to edit a page in one go, rather than removing a section to add back in another edit, which may appear like vandalism. ButterCashier (talk) 10:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dr. María del Socorro Flores González (January 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MarcGarver was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dr. María del Socorro Flores González and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MarcGarver (talk) 16:09, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Hagemaruii! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! MarcGarver (talk) 16:09, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Sangaku into another page. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 00:49, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Verification failed

Hello Hagemaruii! I just reverted your edits to the atomism and history of chemistry pages because the information added was not supported by the source you cited. I checked Needham 1986, p. 91, and it contains nothing about either Mozi or atomism. Did you perhaps cite the wrong volume of Needham? Misrepresenting sources is a serious issue on Wikipedia, so it's important that you post the correct reference here as soon as possible. Thanks!

• Needham, Joseph (1986), Science & Civilisation in China, Volume 5 Part 7: The Gunpowder Epic, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-30358-3

☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 22:03, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I got that reference and about the article in another Wikipedia articles on mohism and Islamic atomism was mentioned in the Wikipedia article on atomism. Hagemaruii (talk) 22:09, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Hagemaruii, as DanCherek explained to you above, you should always give proper attribution by writing in your edit summary which article you were copying from. Do not copy any text again without doing so.

Can you tell me which article you copied the information about Mozi from, so I can remove it from there too? I've seen that the misinformation about Islamic atomism is present in other articles too, but there is a reason why we at Wikipedia are explicit that Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source. You should never just trust anything you read on Wikipedia, especially not when you are editing Wikipedia.

In general, I would like to tell you that by copying text around without checking the sources you are creating a lot of work for other editors. Your English writing skills may also not be strong enough to edit the English Wikipedia. Please consider editing the Wikipedia of your native language instead.

Thanks for taking this into consideration, ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 22:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I am sorry for the mistake but you need to understand that the history of atomism talks about how did ancient civilizations depicted atoms it's not that they had depicted atoms correctly.For example ancient Greeks and Indian sources says that the matter consist of fire,air,earth and light which is not true but they are early conceptions. Hagemaruii (talk) 22:45, 2 February 2023 (UTC)