Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a23844446c97fa14

Jump to content

Talk:Copypasta

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 1 year ago by DaBeamformer777 in topic "More than likely" - idiom?

technology section

[edit]

This section was deleted and I am unsure why. The revision note links to Primary Sources, which as I understand is ok if "reputably published". I would expect the published source code of Linux to suffice as a source that is "reputably published". Maybe I'm missing something? --Doug (talk) 01:06, 24 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Seems like original research rather than a primary source. The reference is an example of an unusual usage of the term. Unless there are better sources, I would suggest removing the section. Pakbelang (talk) 09:44, 12 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

untitled

[edit]

shouldn't it say "elicit" instead of "solicit"?  Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:BCF1:8F0:BDCD:81C5:D2AD:8169 (talk) 22:34, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

or solicit reactions from others - no, solicit is right here, definition: "to persistently endeavor to obtain".  Nixinova T  C   20:25, 12 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

"More than likely" - idiom?

[edit]

Hi! I'm new to Wikipedia, and according to the MoS, idioms should be avoided. Under the Navy Seal subsection, "more than likely" is used, which I interpret to be idiomatic, with just "likely" sufficing. This is however a particularly unambiguous idiom, so would replacing "more than likely" with "likely" be a welcome addition, or overly pedantic? DaBeamformer777 (talk) 23:49, 16 January 2025 (UTC)Reply