User talk:Vlavluck

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nearlyevil665 was:

This is the English-language Wikipedia; we can only accept articles written in the English language. Please provide a high-quality English-language translation of your submission. Have you visited the Wikipedia home page? You can probably find a version of Wikipedia in your language.

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:Иван Монтик 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:Иван Монтик, 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, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

nearlyevil665 18:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vlavluck! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering 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! nearlyevil665 18:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to SoftSwiss have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: SoftSwiss was changed by Vlavluck (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.922273 on 2021-05-07T14:12:17+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 14:12, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:Иван Монтик 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:Иван Монтик, 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, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

CommanderWaterford (talk) 14:39, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Hello, Vlavluck. 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. Hemiauchenia (talk) 09:40, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Ivan Montik instead.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Two copies of this page have been created, in draft space and in article space. It is not necessary to create two copies of the same page, and it annoys the reviewers. This is sometimes done in order to bypass Articles for Creation review. However, if a submitter is ready to have the article in article space, it can be moved into article space, rather than creating a copy. It is common for a page that has been duplicated in draft space and in article space to be nominated for deletion or proposed for deletion.

If the article is kept, this draft should be redirected to the article. If the article is deleted, this draft may be kept for future improvement.

This draft has been copied into article space and tagged for deletion. If the article is deleted, this draft can be kept.

Multiple editors appear to be using the exact same words to describe this person.

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:Ivan Montik 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:Ivan Montik, 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, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 17:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Valaleilo per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Valaleilo. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  ST47 (talk) 05:27, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Robert McClenon: Hi, can you please explain me why i've been blocked so i have no illusions about it. Which actions should I stop to make to have opportunity to join back to community?

In my protection i will tell the story of my crime. I found a topic that interests me (gambling). I started editing an article about one of the companies. After that I found a topic about which I would like to write - about the founder of the company. I have realized how difficult it is and have been working on that more than a month. Then i notice that someone violate the wiki community guidelines and make the report on the page Talk: SoftSwiss, but everyone didn't care. The user Fact789 continue to do it, and even find the way to make me a criminal and added me to a notice board. For defense I added him to a notice board too, but other user delete my post. After it i was broken. And made a desperate attempt to publish article and leave Wikipedia for a while. Now I see that this is not how things are done. I want to apologize to you and the wikipedia community and ask for permission to return to the community. I also ask you to pay attention to my report on the Talk: SoftSwiss page and help solve this situation.

I acknowledge that these are my accounts: Anti Antonio, Coldmanviktor, Vlavluck. But Valaleilo, Timumba, Kigorus - they have nothing to do with me.Vlavluck (talk) 09:12, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Vlavluck (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I've understood why I've been blocked: for abusing multiple accounts and gaming the process of publication. I apologize for the breach of trust. I promise not to do it in future. I will focusing on making edites in categories about IT sphere and soft developing.Vlavluck (talk) 09:12, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I suggest you read and take advantage of the standard offer. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 23:39, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

User:Vlavluck - I did not block you. I requested that a CheckUser compare the IP addresses used by multiple accounts, because there appeared to be sockpuppetry. It appears that ST47 performed that check, and found conclusive evidence of the improper use of multiple accounts. I see that the CheckUser notes show that some of the matches are more certain than others. That is consistent with your statement that only some of the accounts are yours, in which case there may two sockpuppeteers, who both are blocked and both should be blocked.

You ask me to explain why you have been blocked so that you will have no illusions. I have no control over what your illusions are. I do not know why you thought it was either necessary or appropriate to use three accounts. You either knew that the dishonest use of multiple accounts is not permitted, or should have known that the use of multiple accounts is not permitted. If you really thought that the use of multiple accounts is the way Wikipedia works, then neither ST47 nor I nor anyone else can help that you are too stupid. I don't think that you are stupid. I think that you misbehaved and got caught. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:07, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you used multiple accounts because you thought that another gang or sockfarm was using multiple accounts. If so, that is not an excuse. If you suspected that someone else was engaged in sockpuppetry, you could have reported it, and they would have been caught, just as both they and you have been caught.

Since you did not have a history of constructive editing, I see no reason to unblock one of your accounts with a one account restriction. I am satisfied if the responding administrator declines your unblock request. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:07, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]