User talk:David.Tomanek

David.Tomanek, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi David.Tomanek! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Nick Moyes (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:10, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, David.Tomanek, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was User:David.Tomanek/sandbox, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:03, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi David. I realize you're only working on a userspace draft at the moment, but as I pointed out in my reply at Wikipedia:Teahouse#I wish to post an image, you probably should take a close look at some of the pages (blue words) linked to in the above template for some general information on policies and guidelines that are likely going to apply to you and the draft you're working on. I haven't added the template to try and discourage you or because you've seriously violated some policy and guideline already; I've just added it for reference because it contains links to pages you may find helpful. Some other things that you might want to take a look at are Wikipedia:Username policy#Real names and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is in the real world. You can use your real name as your username, but there may be some unforeseen disadvantages in doing so, particularly if you're a well-known person in your particular field or specialty. Moreover, since you seem to be trying to create an article about yourself, Wikipedia has no way of know whether you really are who you say you are; so, you may be asked to provide verification of your identity (via Wikipedia:OTRS) to ensure that nobody is trying to impersonate you if such a thing becomes a concern. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:15, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Tománek (March 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. 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:David Tománek and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:David Tománek, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 22:56, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions; however, it appears you may have written a Wikipedia article about yourself, at Draft:David Tománek. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to or change an existing article about yourself, you are welcome to propose the changes by visiting the article's talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was the page I created deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss this with the deleting administrator. Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 06:01, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Peer review

In (most) Sciences, contributions (articles, reviews, comments) are reviewed not only by editors from the field, but also anonymous peers. Nobody gets money for publishing. The peer review process decides if an article is likely noteworthy or not, and if there may be weak points. Every field has its quirks. Mentions that may see superfluous to some are the key. If a painter was taught by Michelangelo, he/she is from the Michelangelo school that has particular notes. Sciences are the same. Even Wikipedia should respect the specifics of a field, since pages published there may be taken as a reference by people in the field. Of course, neutrality and information value to the public consumer of Wikipedia have highest priority. In my field of expertise, nanotechnology, I see a lot of biased information. Writings of a Sci-Fi author with no background knowledge are taken at par with what Science knows. So far, I have not seen much damage, but the effect of playing down dangers and ignoring the real issues is real. As recognition of Art schools may be foreign to a Wikipedia editor with legal background, so will insight into exact sciences be hard for someone without the background. David.Tomanek (talk) 13:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:David Tománek has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:David Tománek. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 21:25, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:David Tománek has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:David Tománek. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 22:22, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because the username, David.Tomanek, matches the name of a well-known, living person.

If you are the person represented by this username, please note that the practice of blocking such usernames is to protect you from being impersonated, not to discourage you from editing Wikipedia. You may choose to edit under a new username (see information below), but keep in mind that you are welcome to continue to edit under this username. If you choose to do so, we ask the following:

1. Please be willing and able to prove your identity to Wikipedia.
2. Please send an email to info-enwikimedia.org. Be aware that the volunteer response team that handles email is indeed operated entirely by volunteers, and the reply may not be immediate.

If you are not the person represented by this username, you are welcome to choose a new username (see below).

A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive, or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:

1. Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} below. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "Email this user" on their talk page.
2. At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
3. Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.

If you think that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding {{unblock|Your reason here}} below this notice, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Orange Mike | Talk 06:18, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, David.Tomanek, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Wikitucky (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

User name change

I do believe that Wikipedia editors do see how an individual is editing a particular page. I do understand the request to change my user name to an acronym (we usually frown on this in Science; each person is responsible for what they do), but I did it. It is unfortunate to be attacked for using "multiple accounts" -- I asked the first account to be deleted and move to the other. Wikitucky (talk) 17:35, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

You were requested to change your user name with the link above NOT to create another account. Theroadislong (talk) 18:07, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: David.Tomanek has been identity verified by User:Martin Urbanec. They do not need to change their username nor create a new account (I have since unblocked them). Additionally, I want to note that the instructions specifically recommend creating a new account — in bold — in the templated block rationale located in the above section. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 21:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

External, verifiable sources

I was amused seeing a request to quote "external, verifiable sources" beyond scientific publications. My amusement stems from the fact that scientific publications (at least the reputable ones) are all reviewed by anonymous peers and undergo strict criteria before being published; rejection rate in journals such as Science or Nature amounts to maybe 95%. It appears to me that sources such as New York Times, also with verifiable external references, are trusted more. Is this true? Even versed journal editors often get their stories wrong, since the review of their contributions is very superficial, and since they may misunderstand a scientific topic. I do wish that Wikipedia editors do not trust journals too much as a source of information with public appeal. Public appeal -- yes, as long as it is not misleading or even wrong. Wikitucky (talk) 17:43, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Mythbuster: (Financial) Interests (COI) of Professors and Scientists

As a greenhorn in Wikipedia editing, I am not sure where I am. I should be in Wikitucky's domain, posting for Teahouse. (If I am not, please help me.) There is a myth: "Scientists adn Professors do what they do for money". Truth: they are mostly the same poor fellows like all of the Wikipedia editors. They get paid NOTHING for publishing. Sometimes they have to pay the fee for the "golden open access" to their articles (nothing to do with preditory publishers). Mostly they do not have the money to do so. In this case -- COI = conflict of interest is zilch. I would say, with a big margin of confidence, that authors with affiliations in Academia and in the National Labs do not see any (financial or non-financial) benefit from publishing. Wikitucky (talk) 18:21, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Your conflict of interest has nothing to do with what money you earn, but using Wikipedia to promote yourself against all the guidelines. Theroadislong (talk) 19:12, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:David Tománek has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:David Tománek. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi David.Tomanek! You created a thread called Posting of own pages -- University Faculty persons at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: User:David.Tomanek/sandbox has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:David.Tomanek/sandbox. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 20:42, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (April 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. 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 User:David.Tomanek/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:David.Tomanek/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 22:43, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Tománek has been accepted

David Tománek, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DGG ( talk ) 18:25, 5 October 2020 (UTC)