User talk:27.97.199.202

May 2018
Hello, I'm DatGoodDude342. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Photoelectric effect have been undone because they 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. DatGoodDude342 (talk) 03:30, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Warning
You might have a point, except it's standard practice anywhere on Wikipedia to name the apparent source of any cut and paste material, and people rarely bother to look for more than the first place on Google that hosts the same exact text with a clearly earlier datestamp since nothing else is needed to demonstrate text is lifted from somewhere else (and a presumable copyright violation until it's shown not to be.) Just because this isn't a copyright violation doesn't make it any less appropriate to have removed it until that was demonstrated. It's... weird... to suggest that naming the top hit on Google with identical text is a purposeful attempt to diminish the credibility of something. If you want to improve the article, contribute actual usable sources, don't cut and paste random stuff from your blog. The only wish that caused me to remove it until copyright status was demonstrated was a wish to avoid copyright problems, the same thing that has made me remove text on hundreds of other subjects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gczaeman (talk • contribs) 03:31, 7 May 2018 (UTC)