
Just out of curiosity, what is your natural language, because it's obviously not English, based on your use of articles and idioms, and based on your vocabulary. For just one example, I believe you have the concept of "in-text citation" totally confused with the concept of block quoting. Whenever you "paraphrase" any idea from any source, you still need a citation for that source, which usually takes the form of an in-text citation, like this: (Jones, 2017). There's no such thing as "paraphrasing" anything (even if you rewrite the idea entirely in your own words) without a citation that doesn't amount to plagiarism for using someone else's intellectual ideas and presenting them as your own, which is exactly what you're doing if you don't cite whatever you've "paraphrased."
The actual threshold for plagiarism these days is at 20%.
Where are you getting this information? Because if you mean that the threshold for properly-cited
quoted material is 20%, that's plausible, precisely because it's not "plagiarism" to use quotes with proper attribution, but professors still don't want students filling up their essays with quotes (even properly-cited ones) instead of their own ideas and arguments. However, if you're suggesting that professors allow students to actually
plagiarize 20% of their writing, that sounds ridiculous to me, because it means that a student could literally copy & paste a full page of material for every five pages of an assignment. There is no professor who allows students to copy & paste material for one-fifth of written projects.
I'm not saying (any of) this for the purpose of insulting you, but ever since you joined this forum, you've been dispensing advice as though you're an experienced professional writer; but quite a lot of what you say either makes no sense or completely contradicts other things that you say, often in the same post. It's also quite obvious that you cannot possibly be an experienced professional writer.