User talk:Daphne-3

October 2009: Citations found and included for your contribution to Teleology

Hi Daphne-3. I hope you are still checking out Wikipedia, if for no other purpose than to catch out other plagiarising students (you know - “gotcha, now smarten up your act” – plagiarism after all, being about the plagiariser, not the source, which varies in generations, cultures, and eras).

It has been almost a year since your contribution to the article on Teleology on 17 November 2008. I note that not only is it still there as you wrote it, but that moreover, I was able to use the information provided by you to track down an online citation for Aristotle’s original writings, and add this to your contribution. So I am now aware of something that I was not otherwise aware of, and would not in the normal course of my attempts at understanding the world, have had cause to encounter (it not being practical for me to track down and read hard-copy sources for everything, much as my fantasies would have me do).

I hope you were not too put off by your earlier encounters. These things happen. But the challenge is to make resources like this ever more useful and usable. Even perhaps by setting exercises for students, including (but not limited to) plagiarisers. E.g., you offer a choice: a severe penalty for plagiarism, or such penalty held in abeyance, pending the outcome of an exercise in improving the very article plagiarised from. So, as some say, the solution is in the problem.Wotnow (talk) 02:05, 24 October 2009 (UTC)Wotnow

Note: Sockpuppetry not sustained

Also, in case you haven't read the final dialogues at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Daphne-3, I would urge you to do so, as the conclusion was that sockpuppetry was not sustained (and now of course, I know what a sockpuppet is).Wotnow (talk) 02:05, 24 October 2009 (UTC)Wotnow

November 2008

You have been accused of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Daphne-3. Thank you. Willking1979 (talk) 20:29, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I have been using the same account each time, thank you. Daphne-3. There is no puppetry here. Both of the comments were posted by me, back-to-back. I inadvertently forgot to sign the last one, which I've corrected. Daphne-3 (talk) 21:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)Daphne-3.

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 22:16, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

It has been some time but, if you would like to prevent the same result next year, I'd like to discuss with you improvements to your favourite article. Please note that the article at present lacks citations and would benefit from synopses of the subject from notable secondary sources. Original synthesis of primary sources may be removed. There is no reason that the article cannot present instructive differences of opinion, nor that it ought to be "monolithic". Bilious denunciations of wiki on the basis that any adequate article on the subject is impossible are unlikely to help! Whereas skilled references to general articles will help a lot. Please contact me by clicking on my "talk" here -> Redheylin (talk) 20:33, 18 May 2009 (UTC)