User talk:Writercal

Welcome!
Hello, Writercal, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page History of San Francisco have not conformed to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and has been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles. Additionally, all new biographies of living people must contain at least one reliable source.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or. Again, welcome. Marianna251TALK 16:05, 4 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Welcome message struck out due to inaccuracies; see discussion(s) below. I initially felt that this edit did not have nearly enough sources to be considered verifiable; later investigation showed a much bigger problem, i.e. that it had been wholly copied and pasted from this source. Earwig's copyvio detector flagged the edit as having a 95.7% probability of being a copyright violation (although an experienced admin later clarified that it's from a free source). It's copied-and-pasted from the source with no in-text attribution, and this editor is still claiming that they didn't copy and paste, which means they are claiming that the edit was their own words, which is the definition of plagiarism. Marianna251TALK 22:28, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Copypasted content / your Teahouse question
Hello Writercal, thank you for your efforts to improve these articles. However, content should not be simply copypasted from external sources. I have added a few more details at your question on WP:Teahouse, but please feel free to ask me or at the Teahouse, if you have further questions about editing on Wikipedia. We'd be glad to help. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 23:50, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

May 2019
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User talk:Marianna251. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 16:42, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

I did not attack anyone personally -- I said that they edited and deleted an hour worth of my work for no reason and were inaccurate. All of my work is sourced. I said that they are acting like "Nazis" and have in effect censored Wikipedia by whitewashing and removing facts on the Presidio and Buffalo Soldiers. Yet -- you type something that you can block me? More censorship. So it's okay for you to 'threaten' me but it's not okay for me to complain that an edit made that San Francisco *should* include info about the Presidio and about Buffalo Soldiers should be included but instead some random person, Marianna251 DELETED IT FOR NO REASON. Saying there were no sources. It is all sourced. I have never edited anything on Wikipedia and I assure you I never will again. What a waste of time! What a bunch of power hungry people going around DELETING things for no reason. I can't think of one valid reason which is why I complained. While you're at it, maybe in the historical overviews of history by year, for example 1900, 1901 etc. YOU MIGHT WANT TO INCLUDE ONE WOMAN. Just one. Women are a part of history. Bias much? If Wikipedia is a "collective" well then -- all voices are a valid part of the collective, including my own. Just like all collectivist things -- it gets overrun by Power Hungry people who act like bullies. I'm not power hungry. I simply want my edit on the Presidio to stand. It should have never been deleted by an overzealous editor for absolutely no reason. It's bizarre that Wikipedia has people going around deleting other people's edits - my edit was properly sourced. It's FACTUAL information on the Presidio. The Presidio is an important part of San Francisco and is not included on the page. If there is something I don't understand about Wikipedia then my bad but that is my reaction. I stand by it. If you block me -- I don't really care. I said my peace. Please be more inclusive and include my edit on the Presidio.Writercal (talk) 13:09, 5 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Writercal, it's clear you feel strongly about this; strongly enough to leave insults against me on my talk page twice - once in May 2019 and the other in August 2018. In my previous reply to you, I explained why I reverted your edit, and commented that I had realised your edit was copied and pasted from the single source listed, which is plagiarism and never okay. You stated on my talk page "I am a professional researcher and a Professor", so I would assume that you are already aware of what constitutes plagiarism, and that it is always unacceptable, whether in academic work or on a free website edited by volunteers. Make edits in your own words, or not at all.
 * Finally, you have made personal attacks against me, repeatedly. You've stated that I am on a power trip, that I am against African-Americans, that I want to white-wash history, and that I'm a Nazi - all of which are personal attacks, and all because I reverted a single edit of yours. Please read the behavioural guideline on assuming good faith. It is vitally important when editing Wikipedia.
 * I am always happy to engage in civil discussions about edits. However, since the only interaction I have had with you has been unwarranted personal attacks on two separate occasions for the same revert, months apart and without any prompting or interaction from me, I ask that you do not comment on my talk page again. I have no interest in having the same discussion with you over and over. Marianna251TALK 07:06, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Marianna251 My discussion is civil. The only item copy and pasted was a photo. Don't accuse me of "plagiarism" you are totally wrong! You attack me but at the same time say you don't appreciate attacks. I put it there and you decided to delete it for absolutely no reason. The photo is in the public domain. On behalf of all Buffalo Soldiers and their families and all San Francisco people who really love parks and the Presidio, please in your civil manner please include my edit and stop randomly deleting things -- in the interest of fairness. Writercal (talk) 19:53, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Discuss the issue on the article's talk page. Without consensus, you'll have to accept that Wikipedia is not going to read the way you would prefer. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 20:23, 31 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I wasn't going to comment here again, but I can't let your claim that "the only item copy and pasted was a photo" slide. This edit you made, the one I reverted, is a word for word copy of this. You even copied the formatting. Marianna251TALK 22:25, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Please be careful about what you say to people. Some remarks, such as your addition to User talk:Marianna251 can easily be misinterpreted, or viewed as harassment. Wikipedia is a supportive environment, where contributors should feel comfortable and safe while editing. ''You were asked to stay off Marianna's talk page, which on Wikipedia is a norm. Post there again and I will make this an issue.'' Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 20:43, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

July 2020
Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User talk:Writercal. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 14:31, 3 July 2020 (UTC)