User talk:Nonchalant77

July 2017
Hello, I'm Binksternet. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Scientology seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 18:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

September 2017
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Scientology: A History of Man. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 16:15, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Nonchalant77, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Dianetics: The Modern Science of Mental Health have been removed, as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues here.


 * 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 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 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 Copyrights. You may also want to review 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 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 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 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 Translation. See also 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. Binksternet (talk) 16:18, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Reusing citations
Please review Help:Footnotes. The details you've added to Scientology articles are usually supported by a handful of sources. Redundant refs should be consolidated under the same citations. The timeline article, for example, uses six identical copies of the Lewis reference. This makes reference lists harder to read, as they become bloated with redundant information. When done repeatedly, redundant refs also artificially inflate the significance of the attached details, as they subtly misrepresent the true number of sources. Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 21:46, 2 October 2017 (UTC)


 * This isn't helpful, because now there are two different version of the exact same source, and the most recently added is malformed. Is "Brill" one of the authors, or the publisher? Do you understand the problem? Grayfell (talk) 22:57, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I followed the instructions in the footnote section as I understood it. Brill is the publisher.Nonchalant77 (talk) 16:26, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Notice of discretionary sanctions
jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 00:25, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

August 2018
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Scientology. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 21:44, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

September 2018
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Scientology beliefs and practices, you may be blocked from editing. Grayfell (talk) 22:11, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Your edits
I'm concerned that you don't understand our policies well enough to avoid sanctions. I've raised the issue of your understanding at WP:FTN. Doug Weller talk 10:39, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Stop editing Scientology pages
Yeah — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2D80:6A83:C200:D4CA:6629:2AAD:1F50 (talk) 10:44, 27 August 2019 (UTC)