User talk:Sumark

Disambiguation link notification for December 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Feature detection (nervous system), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gestalt. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 19:56, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. I deleted the link to 'Gestalt'. Sumark (talk) 07:39, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; however, please remember the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Vision in toads, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless that text is available under a suitable free license. It is almost never okay to copy extensive text out of a book or website and paste it into a Wikipedia article with little or no alteration, though you can clearly and briefly quote copyrighted text in the right circumstances. Content that does not comply with this legal rule must be removed. For more information on this, see:

If you still have questions, there is the Teahouse, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page and someone will be along to answer it shortly. As you get started, you may find the pages below to be helpful.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:53, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Diannaa,

Thank you very much for welcoming me. As an expert in the field of research, I'm enjoying the editing of 'vision in toads'. All of the contributions designed by me to text, figures, and references editing do not include any copy-righted originals from other sources [sources in figures are indicated: "Adapted (or modified) from data by Author (19..; 20..)]."

My contributions to 'vision in toads' are almost finished now.

Best wishes

(Sumark (talk) 08:52, 4 February 2026 (UTC))[reply]

February 2026

Your edit to Vision in toads 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. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:05, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa,

thanks for your comment. I'm not aware of having infringed copy right in any place of my contributions to "Vision in toads". I have already replaced the text you deleted by a ‘short version incl. the known 4 refs as sources' and would appreciate your comments: Please give me an example from the text you've blocked where and how I should have requested copyright permission!

Sumark Sumark (talk) 08:09, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sumark. I found some copyright content that was a match for this journal article. Matching content included:

"Computer simulations demonstrate a remarkable match between the model performance and the original experimental data on which the dishabituation hierarchy was based. A set of model predictions is presented, concerning mechanisms of habituation and cellular organization of the medial pallium"
"serves as an example of a fruitful dialogue between experimentation and modeling, crucial for understanding brain functions"
"a neural model of visual pattern discrimination for stimulus-specific habituation was developed, based on previous behavioral studies which demonstrated that toads exhibit a dishabituation hierarchy for different worm-like stimuli. The model suggests that visual objects are represented by temporal coding and predicts that the dishabituation hierarchy changes when the stimulus/background contrast direction is reversed or the stimulus size is varied"
"Computer simulations demonstrate a remarkable match between the model performance and the original experimental data on which the dishabituation hierarchy was based. A set of model predictions is presented, concerning mechanisms of habituation".

Your new version looks okay from a copyright point of view. Requesting permission would involve contacting the author(s) and asking them to release the content under a compatible license. Instructions are located at Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:06, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa:

Let us finish the topic now. I understand that you as a representative of wikipedia.en editors must be alert to any copyright violations. I appreciate that you find my new incorporated text version acceptable.

A comparison of

the new accepted incorporated text

„Computer simulations demonstrate a match between a model [cf. Wang & Ewert 1992; Wang & Arbib 1992] and the original experimental data [Ewert & Kehl 1978] on which the dishabituation hierarchy is based. Model predictions concern the processes of habituation and the function of the ventral medial pallium, vMP, and explain why habituation is abolished after experimental lesions [Finkenstädt & Ewert 1988] to vMP“

with the critical text part you sent me [without that you have considered the inline citations (bold face)]

“Computer simulations demonstrate a remarkable match between the model performance (cf. Wang & Ewert 1992, Wang & Arbib 1992) and the original experimental data (Ewert & Kehl 1978) on which the dishabituation hierarchy was based. A set of model predictions is presented (Wang & Ewert 1992, Wang & Arbib 1992), concerning mechanisms of habituation and cellular organization of the medial pallium‘ (Finkenstädt and Ewert 1978)“

looks to me not much different because, here too, credit of scientific news is specifically assigned to the authors. No author could complain that during editing, the editing person has ‚stolen‘ the author’s scientific property.

This was my very last contribution to „Vision in toads“.

Sincerely,

Sumark. Sumark (talk) 06:35, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]