User talk:Acad1989

Welcome!

Hello, Acad1989! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 22:36, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Acad1989, you are invited to the Co-op!

Hi there! Acad1989, you are invited to The Co-op, a gathering place for editors where you can find mentors to help you build and improve Wikipedia. If you're looking for an editor who can help you out, please join us! I JethroBT (I'm a Co-op mentor)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 22:45, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

My name is Buster7. Welcome to Wikipedia. I will be in touch with you later today. . Buster Seven Talk 14:47, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for warm welcome - I have only one problem: If I add citations - I don`t know what I must do with the html code...to add the source name. For example reference 2 here: Angel Balevski looks not good: ^ http://www.ias-icsd.org/resources/ICSD-IAS-Presidium.pdf

First things first. Good habits. You need to always sign anything you add to a talk page with fours "tildes. Which you will find Up in the left hand corner of your keyboard. Maybe check out this page before we start...and give it a quick read. It seems from the way you are editing articles that you are aware of many of them already. . Buster Seven Talk 21:11, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We will go over your editing to the Angel Balevski article soon. You did very well. Have you edited at Wikipedia before? . Buster Seven Talk 21:15, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have taken a brief look at your contributions and notice that you are already quite capable as an editor. Let me point out one thing I noticed. You don't use the edit summary to explain what you are doing. I would suggest that, for your own benefit and the benefit of your fellow editors that you begin to remember to use the edit summary, always! Buster Seven Talk 21:23, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to do some edits to the Balevski article. You can then see what I did and we can discuss my changes. . Buster Seven Talk 21:32, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - what can I do against conflicts ? Because I tried to answer you twice but anything is lost. Brrr....--Acad1989 (talk) 21:40, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not much you can do but wait. It happens a lot when many editors are all trying to "talk" at the same time. If what you replied was long and you get a edit conflict message you should copy what you write so you don't have to say it over. . Buster Seven Talk 21:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I know you had an "edit conflict" situation...but I have not heard from you since then. Shall we continue? . Buster Seven Talk 11:50, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was only a conflict on this site...:), now I copy all what I write before save. I wanted only say that I have worked sometimes here as IP - but only small contributions. I tried to make the reference style in my draft IUAPPA as a training - puh..., its not so easy, one simple mistake and you got a crazy result, and also I saw that there are different styles... I have maybe problems with paraphrase, this was the reaction of my IUAPPA draft. And I was astonished that so many second references are needed for notability - its hard work, specially if a organization make bad PR Work. After the Kofler article I found so many references that I add some of them, even I found other persons were no article is here, and so I create some. I have already a small working list....enough for this year, because I must work....Thank you for assistance.--Mingo 12:54, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

A new thread for a different conversation on a different topic

I suggest you create a user page. Buster Seven Talk 21:54, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A user page is a nice addition to your Wikipedia experience. They can be informative or just fun or anywhere in between. As for references, check out Help:Referencing for beginners. I changed the reference on the Angel Balevski page. You might check it out to see the difference, before (you) and after (me). That is how I did a lot of my early learning here at WP. I would see what another editor did so I would know better the next time. Good Luck, stay in touch. I'm always available for assistance. . Buster Seven Talk 13:28, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Suggesting you use the edit summary

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed. It also helps you to specifically locate edits you have made in the past (via View history or User contributions). So please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. . Buster Seven Talk 22:00, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Angel Balevski article

Check out this diff and see how I changed how the reference was desplaying in the reflist. I used the Template box and chose "cite web" in the drop-down menu. If it had been a book, the cite choice would be "cite Book"...etc. . Buster Seven Talk 22:15, 15 March 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: IUAPPA (March 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Kharkiv07 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:IUAPPA and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Kharkiv07 ^Talk 02:20, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Acad1989, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Kharkiv07 ^Talk 02:20, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:IUAPPA has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:IUAPPA. Thanks! Kharkiv07 ^Talk 20:13, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: IUAPPA (March 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mr. Guye was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms, that are designed to promote or show-off the subject.

You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:IUAPPA and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Mr. Guye (talk) 23:59, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 12:19, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: IUAPPA (March 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Lixxx235 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:IUAPPA and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

--L235 (t / c / ping in reply) 03:39, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Acad1989. Try [1]. It might fit the Golden Rule. One more thing. If you continue to NOT sign your edits on talk pages, I'm afraid I will have to withhold my time and assistance. Reliable secondary sources are available if you ask the right google questions. Go to the sites that Li235 suggests. . Buster Seven Talk 16:07, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - I have a technical problem with my signature - I change something to Mingo, now if I press the button Mingo comes - but not as signature....and after some minutes the signature appears. What shall I do ? Maybe revert the name..--Mingo 16:16, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

New try..--Mingo (talk) 16:27, 19 March 2015 (UTC)...Happy Homo Sapiens..:)[reply]

(ec) I was about to leave the following message but got an "edit conflict" message instead.

"In the top left hand corner of your keyboard is the key that shows (~) in the upper-case. If you press it 4 times (normally using ~~~~), and hit enter, your generic signature will show up. Wikipedia:Signatures explains it in much more detail. Good Luck!. Buster Seven Talk 16:37, 19 March 2015 (UTC)".[reply]

But I see you figured it out. Well Done! . Buster Seven Talk 16:37, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

BTW (=By the way) the (ec) at the front of my message lets you (and anyone else that is watching or will read this in the future) know that I experienced a "edit conflict". Its a courtesy that most editors use to explain a delay or an out-of-sequence response. . Buster Seven Talk 16:41, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Co-op Survey

Hi there! Thanks for contributing your time to learning contributing to Wikipedia through mentorship at The Co-op. The Co-op is actually a very new project on Wikipedia, and you've been a great help in helping us improve it so far. We want to get your feedback on your use of the Co-op in addition to your experience with your mentor and editing Wikipedia generally. When you are able, please take the Qualtrics survey here to give us your feedback. With your help, we can make the Co-op and mentorship helpful for different needs, and expand the space for many editors to use. Thanks for your help, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

Hello, Acad1989. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:57, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. I try very hard to keep a neutral point of view and not to take content directly. The real problem I had was regarding Mission, I looked at it on other scintific sites and did similar. Otherwise it will be difficult to understand.... Mayby you have an idea ? I have reformulated almost everything else. The International Academy of Science is very often mentioned in other articles, but only as International Academy of Science without Munich (this is the legal name !). I checked in each case if the linking and the reference is correct, I add Munich and a links in other articles. Better would be a label International Academy of Science without Munich or a redirect, that would simplify some things. I am actually finished, maybe some one can help to neutralize the article. Also a small infobox would be good. Thank you. --Mingo (talk) 23:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The real problem is WP:COI. The best solution, as you stated here two days ago, is to cease editing when there is conflict of interest. Thank you, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:51, 6 February 2021 (UTC) in[reply]

I don´t see a conflict (COI), my last participation in IAS conference/meeting is over 10 years ago and I´m not part of the formal structure, or have a order from anyone to write her. But of course maybe the new headlines (Goals) now, sound a little like advertising, my mistake -the problem ist simple to transform goals in other words. Because you deleted thema. Okay work some days to review- and I look later, maybe really better, it should be a good 100 % conform article. Thank you.--Mingo (talk) 16:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please be concrete with "promotional or advertising material" - for the IAS there ist none of this on the web !--Mingo (talk) 16:19, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Three concrete examples:

Copying "missions and objectives" statements from the official website, converting the Wikipedia article into a marketing catalogue entry
Name-dropping, "including many Nobel Laureates and members from 81 national academies of sciences", while relying primarily on official primary sources instead of independent secondary sources (see WP:PSTS)
Creating a list of potentially irrelevant awards "for outstanding scientific and practical achievements" without any context or independent relevance proof for individual entries

You "don't see a conflict", but multiple users do, and the problem with such conflicts is exactly that "editors with a COI are sometimes unaware of whether or how much it has influenced their editing". So there's a problem here, and the easiest solution is to stop editing the article. You are welcome to suggest changes on the talk page of the article, by clicking the text "request corrections on or suggest content" in the orange box at the top.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a simple fact, also with many links here in the WP (some of them I controlled first, same were wrong, like Karl Steinbuch) - backed up with thousands of pages of material. Gives me one reputable secondary source which contradicts this: "including many Nobel Laureates and members from 81 national academies of sciences" sentence ! Name-dropping- You are questioning the reputation of the IAS leadership, Prof. Kofler an others, he is a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the second largest academy in the world (50,000 researchers). No, that's nonsense. The huge Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences was even a founding member...nearly 20 years ago. Also here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azerbaijan_National_Academy_of_Sciences#Academy's_rights you can see, that it is no good idea to demolate formalities whether targets or rights.This is usus here - and no copyright violation ! If not - change this please too !
Turning goals into your own words without losing the essence is very, very difficult. I have already pointed this out above. That's why it's often taken over here 1 to 1. I have translated the n modern language, e.g. from universal to global - I honestly can't do it. Please, summarise it in a way that it can be transferred:
(copied text removed ~ToBeFree 06 February 2021, 22:04 UTC)
Goals have a formal statuts like a charta or constitution and to transform brings something new ! Also I did it in " " - means it was obvious that this is was a citation. This is also not a mission in the sense of WP, as an advertising message, but these are simply formal goals.
I can't judge what is relevant or not, I just took it over, but if you are an expert here, then give the WP relevance rules on it.

I said aleady all about above also yesterday that I´m finshed, but because of this mission question /formal deletion - I had to find a new solution. Unfortunately, no one helped me to clear it out. The first sentence now is not correct. If you can make it better - it would be great !

best regards and I hope you show me a good formulation ! This is still missing. --Mingo (talk) 21:51, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the detailed answer, but please don't write inside the message you're replying to. I see why it was done, but if you look at the resulting discussion page after such an action, you see why it shouldn't have been done. I have now attempted to fix this above, but please check if the result is acceptable, and modify as you like.

The statement of facts can still lack neutrality, for example by introducing undue weight. Balancing facts, and removing irrelevant ones, is important. In such cases, the onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content. In your current situation, this means that any re-introduction of the removed material needs to be discussed on the article's talk page first, and you have not edited the talk page yet. This is fine if you agree with the removal. If you disagree, you may try to gain consensus for your position – not here, but on the article's talk page.

Regarding the goals, these are promotional content. There is no need to attempt to find a neutral wording for them. The proper way is to describe what the article subject actually does, not what they intend to do. Please use independent secondary sources when doing so, and propose changes on the talk page of the article instead of implementing them directly.

There is no strict rule about article content relevance in specific cases. There does, however, seem to be editorial consensus against your interpretation/implementation of WP:NPOV and WP:NOTPROMO. The content was so clearly promotional that, without getting involved in editing the article, I felt a need to warn you about further promotional editing. If you do not intend to edit the article anymore, that's fine. If you do, see the warning. There is no ownership to articles, and the larger community has practically taken over control of the content. As your created article was promotional and there seems to be a conflict of interest involved, you are discouraged from continuing to edit the article directly.

Best regards,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can´t see any promotional content in the goals of the IAS. What kind of advertising should it be ? I think it would be necessary to present the objectives correctly, which is not the case with the first sentence. Also the IAS has no "good marketing" at all, also the website is outdatet a little bit -The most are proofable facts. If you look deeper in the history (I saw), that the formal IAS-ICSD oversighter /lawer (from 1980 to 1996) one of the 42 IAS founders was Hans F. Zacher, the president of Max Planck Society with his Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Social Law.

"If you do not intend to edit the article anymore, that's fine." I said this already the whole day - that I stop one week ! So, I also not use the talk page for contribution. Next week, if I have time I maybe do....

Best regards ...--Mingo (talk) 23:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, "anymore" was a bit unprecise. I meant "after the week". ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited International Academy of Science, Munich, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages TU, LMU and Fernando Morán. 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) 06:06, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of International Academy of Science, Munich for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article International Academy of Science, Munich, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Academy of Science, Munich until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]