User talk:Monstera enjoyer

Welcome to Wikipedia

If you want to know some of the things I wish I had known when I started editing check out my sandbox where I have been working on a guide to editing plant articles. I find archive.org to be incredibly useful for finding information about many plant species and wish I knew about it from day one of editing here. Happy editing. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 16:34, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. Monstera enjoyer (talk) 16:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Homo smalluseditus" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Homo smalluseditus has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 21 § Homo smalluseditus until a consensus is reached. Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:23, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced additions

I have reverted a number of lengthy descriptions you added to plant articles because they were entirely unsourced. Sourcing is not optional - it is the basic requirement for all additions of material to WP. Feel free to re-insert the text IF you provide verifiable and reliable published sources for all statements made. Cheers --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I actually got that info form chatgpt, so should i source it ? I just wanted to know that's all. Monstera enjoyer (talk) 14:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief. Do not use anything you get from ChatGPT or any other AI/LLM sources. Look, please do yourself a favour and acquaint yourself thoroughly with Wikipedia rules before editing. Start with Wikipedia:A primer for newcomers. And as I suspect that you are rather young (apologies if that is not the case), I would also suggest Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors. When it comes to sourcing, all the rules and guidelines are here, but what it comes down to is: if you want to add it to WP, it has to be verifiable (i.e. the reader must be able to look it up) and published (i.e. available for those who try to look it up, at least in principle) and from a reliable source (i.e. some source with editorial oversight - a professionally published book, an edited journal, a newspaper, a curated database, etc.). Grabbing random info from a chatbot violates all of these. Please do not do it. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:58, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i re-added info to the page Calamus manan and provided a source this time. Monstera enjoyer (talk) 15:36, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please DO read the information at WP:Reliable sources. Wikis are not suitable sources because they are crowd-sourced (therefore, WP is not a reliable source either). Don't cite them. In this case, the original source was given (a 1979 book), so that can be cited instead. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:15, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just had a look at your edits and I am going to point out what can go wrong when you do not check sources. I looked up Pteridophyte in the Oxford English Dictionary and it does not mean "feather plant" as you edited on 17 February. It means fern plant because though the Greek word it was derived from meant feather it was the Greek word for fern that was borrowed by Latin and later used in Neo-Latin compound words.

Even when citing a source things can go wrong because a source is mistaken. It is good to be cautious when a source contains a fact that is outside their expertise. When possible it is much better to cite a source about etymology like the OED if you have access or a fairly reliable dictionary like Collins. I've seen the mistaken "feather plant" information in some Encyclopedias like Comptons.

I've also reverted your additions to Monstera glaucescens, but you are welcome to change it back if you find reliable sources. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Monstera enjoyer! Your additions to Monstera dissecta have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's eligibility.
Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § Licensing.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 18:57, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

March 2025

Your edit to Coccothrinax barbadensis has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 18:49, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Entelognathus

A tag has been placed on User:Entelognathus requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

redirect from nonexistant user to main space article - no idea what the thinking was here...

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:50, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects etc.

Could you please stop screwing around with redirects, as you did with User:Entelognathus? It is pretty clear you don't know what you are doing there. WP's navigational structure is not intended for playing twee little nickname games with. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:53, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ah yes, i knew this would happen, i just wanted to see what would happen when i made that redirect, so thanks for the response Monstera enjoyer (talk) 10:59, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Longisquama (disambiguation) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Longisquama (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Longisquama (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:50, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]