User talk:Marjoram Curry

July 2017

Hello, I'm Marianna251. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to ProZ.com have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Marianna251TALK 16:24, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to ProZ.com. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. diff [1]. Tornado chaser (talk) 16:25, 13 July 2017 (UTC) [reply]

This box feels WP:SOAPY

Hi Marianna, I admit that the very last sentence was a way for me to let out the steam because those people a REAL RASCALS - as admitted by ALL TRANSLATORS AND ALL VALUABLE TRANSLATION AGENCIES - I even added A LINK PROVING THAT THIS WAS NOT MY SOLE POINT OF VIEW BUT THAT OF MOST IF NOT ALL TRANSLATORS.

So WHY ON EARTH DID YOU HAVE THE GUTS OF DELETING MY ENTIRE ENTRY JUST BECAUSE OF AN UNDERSTANDABLE LAST SENTENCE?

THOSE PEOPLE ARE CROOKS AND THE WORLD MUST KNOW!

ENTERING CRITICISMS IS PART OF THE WIKIPEDIA PROCESS.

LICKING CROOKS' BOOTS WILL NOT HELP.

THIS DOES NOT AFFECT THE SO-CALLED "NEUTRAL" POINT OF VIEW.

IT IS MADE OUT OF POSITIVE ***AND*** NEGATIVE REMARKS.

AS TO TORNADO CHASER: GO GET FUCKED!!! YOU MUST BE ONE OF THOSE PSYCHOPATHS HIDING UNDER THE TITLE OF "WIKIPEDIA ADMINISTRATOR"

If you fucking asshole had only READ the CONTENT OF MY LINK

THE FUCKING IMBECILE YOU ARE WOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THIS WAS NOT JUST MY PERSONAL POINT OF VIEW.

I AM SICK AND TIRED OF BEING CRITICIZED BY IMBECILES AND DISHONEST ASSHOLES.

GO GET FUCKED.

IF YOU PSYCHOPATHS CANNOT UNDERSTAND THAT A NORMAL HUMAN BEING (CONTRARY TO YOU) HAS EMOTIONS AND FEELINGS AND THAT LETTING THE STEAM OUT ON (ONLY) THE VERY LAST SENTENCE IS UNDERSTANDABLE

THEN YOU PLACE IS IN PRISON

AND CERTAINLY NOT TROLLING AROUND AS FUCKING WIKIPEDIA "AD-MI-NI-STRA-TORS".

YOU GOT THAT?

FUCK OFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF.

THANK YOU.

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Marjoram Curry, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Colonel Tom Parker have been removed, as it appears 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 your sources to avoid copyright or 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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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 information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk 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 Wikipedia: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 can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia: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. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:33, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About your recent edit to Colonel Tom Parker

Hey! Just a heads-up: Wikipedia has a neutrality policy, and your edit was reverted as it violated the policy. Thanks, Remagoxer (talk) 13:00, 12 November 2018 (UTC) [reply]

This box feels WP:SOAPY

Hey Remagoxer:

Why don't you just change whatever detail bothers you,

rather than shockingly deleting hours of valuable work?

PSYCHOPATHS ARE NOT ADMITTED AS ADMINISTRATORS.

AND THEIR POINTS OF VIEW WILL BE THROWN TO TRASH.

GOT IT, NEO-ZIONIST INTRODUCING CENSORSHIP IN ENCYCLOPEDIAS?...

JESUS.

VAN KUIJK WAS A WELL-KNOWN PSYCHOPATH

AND YOUR FUCKING ENCYCLOPEDIA

DOES NOT REFLECT THIS.

IT IS NO LONGER AN ENCYCLOPEDIA.

IT IS CENSORSHIP

TO PROTECT THE DICTATORSHIP

OF MENTALLY ILL NEO-ZIONISTS.

THIS IS MY CONCLUSION.

AND THE ENTIRE WORLD WILL KNOW.

TRUST ME ON THIS :-)

Please calm down; your edits were found to be violating said policy, and so someone (not me, I just informed you) reverted it. Remagoxer (talk) 13:52, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also I had to revert your most recent edit, as it broke the same policy. Please stop. Remagoxer (talk) 13:56, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disccusion at ANI

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding your behaviour. The thread is User:Marjoram Curry. Remagoxer (talk) 14:08, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 14:11, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]