User talk:Kraljmatjaz

Your draft article, Draft:Andreas Holzinger[edit]

Hello, Kraljmatjaz. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Andreas Holzinger".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus 08:08, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Kraljmatjaz. 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 Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
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. MrOllie (talk) 13:05, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any conflict of interest nor external relationship, I just added an important topic, which should be of interest also for others working with personas. Kraljmatjaz (talk) 13:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Given the history of WP:SPA accounts promoting this author, I simply don't believe you. MrOllie (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

it's not about your believe, it's about truth and an important fact. judging people by a low activity is without evidence Kraljmatjaz (talk) 13:39, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When 100% of activity is promotional, that is the evidence. MrOllie (talk) 13:43, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

first it is not promotional, I added an reference some years ago when writing my thesis, and now I add another topic which es essential. you should better correct a series of mistakes, which I have now seen by chance on the wikipedia page of my home municipality Kraljmatjaz (talk) 13:50, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Warning about unattributed copying[edit]

Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you have added Creative Commons licensed text to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Persona (user experience). You are welcome to import appropriate Creative Commons licensed content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Compatibly licensed sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any Creative Commons content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you.

Additionally, when you make a bold edit that is reverted, the status quo should remain while a discussion is started instead of edit-warring. DanCherek (talk) 13:59, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

you are talking in so much wikipedia specific termini to me, what does the first comment mean ?, I have added a reference to the article, but it seems that the text is to much much the same? I just rewrote it, is this ok?

The second comment I don't unterstand. what should I do, if an contribution is just deleted, there was no comment to my contribution, what do you expect now to do the new text?

sorry, for not making it in the right way, I'have to learn how to do it, Cheers Karl Kraljmatjaz (talk) 14:27, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The first comment means that you were copying text from elsewhere to Wikipedia without providing any indication that it was copied, which is plagiarism. The second comment means that when you make an edit and someone reverses it, if you still feel that the edit should be made you should start a new discussion at the talk page (Talk:Persona (user experience)) and seek consensus for that edit, rather than reinstate it in the article. DanCherek (talk) 14:36, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I got the first one thanks, for the discussion you mean this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Persona_(user_experience)

or do I have to start the talk in the history of the article when it was deleted ?

once again sorry for the beginners questions Kraljmatjaz (talk) 14:42, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the talk page link that you posted is the correct one. DanCherek (talk) 14:44, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Who is this Ollie thats removes always my contribution, can you please help what I have to do in the talk page to discuss this further ? Kraljmatjaz (talk) 10:42, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Prague astronomical clock simulators[edit]

Thank you for your comments supporting the links to simulators for the Prague Astronomical Clock. I hadn't felt like going through the hassle of arguing for the links to be restored, but knowing someone else considers the simulations valuable is good to know, so now I am requesting the links be restored in the talk page about the clock. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kshetline (talk • contribs) 19:57, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]