User talk:Wm chytrid

Former Talk Page[edit]

Everything here has been copied from User_talk:Chytrid_Wm

Wm chytrid (talk) 18:17, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on Evolutionary lanscapes[edit]

		The Stub Barnstar
		I don't know if you check your talk page but well done on the evolutionary landscapes page. It was a complete stub before and is getting pretty good now! T. Shafee (Evo&Evo) (talk) 10:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of The Incredibles characters[edit]

Hi. Please do not remove valid, relevant content from Wikipedia articles, as you did with your removal of the fashion designers spotlighted by Unzipped in your edits to List of The Incredibles characters here and here. It is perfectly relevant to mention some of the designers that the focus of that film, in order to provide explanatory clarity and context to the passage that explains that the creators of The Incredibles looked to that documentary for inspiration. Removing mention of those designers is not reasonable.

Also, saying that a character was conceived as an amalgam of different previous characters is reasonable and clear. Saying that a character "is a combination of" them is not, since it does not make it clear that this is how the creators of that character created it. Such a wording could just as easily be interpreted as a secondary analysis, which the passage is not trying to convey.

And contrary to your statement here, one sentence is not "still plagiarism. Plagiarism requires that a substantial amount of the referenced material be copied verbatim. One sentence is not substantial, and the sentence is not a verbatim copy of the source. Because that sentence is short and to the point, summarizing it with different wording that does either appear arbitrary or omit important details can be problematic, but the sentence in the Wikipedia article is fine, and does not pose a copyright problem (which is indeed the relevant issue, and not plagiarism). Nonetheless, I changed the word cross to amalgam to distance it just a bit more from the source material, if that makes you feel better. But please do not remove important details from the article or introduce more clunky wording again. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 20:46, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]