User talk:Vilamich

This is Vilamich's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kesznick has been accepted[edit]

Kesznick, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Theroadislong (talk) 18:38, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

kesznick[edit]

Please indicate where on this map Kesznick is... [1] Theroadislong (talk) 19:33, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018[edit]

You do not blank an entire Talk page because you don't like the reception you're getting. Period. Understood? General Ization ^Talk 19:43, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE STOP FLODDING THE PAGES I ATTEMPT TO COMMENT ON WITH EDIT CONFLICTS, FORCING MY COMMENTS IN DEFENSE TO BE LOST.Vilamich (talk)

Please don't yell. (use all caps). No one is "flooding" anything. People are offering good faith comments. I strongly suggest you heed them. 331dot (talk) 19:48, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No one is flooding pages in an effort to prevent you from commenting. The conversation you are having is not the only conversation occurring on that page. Edit conflicts occur when two editors try to save their comments, regardless of the content of the conversation. My question above concerning your understanding was not rhetorical. I am waiting for a response. Failing that, I will request you be blocked from editing. General Ization ^Talk 19:49, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I mistakenly only copied the section edit block - rather than the entire page - when I attempted to copy and paste the original source WITH a well-formulated and civil comment I attempted FIVE TIMES to add! I apologize for this mistake. Vilamich (talk) 19:50, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am writing a response now, please do not edit my talk page until I have responded thank you Vilamich (talk) 19:51, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why it is taking you almost 10 minutes to prepare your reply. In general, you should not copy and paste an entire page in order to add your comments to it, as you are likely to overwrite comments written in the meantime (like this one) when you paste the edited edition back to that page. Edit using the online editor. I will take your apology as acknowledgement and assume you will take care to not blank a page again. General Ization ^Talk 20:03, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In response to comments at the teahouse, I cannot tell where the village is because the map in the link is very far off from anything I recognize from aerial view as being the village. You will also notice on satellite image that there are many unlabeled populated areas. It’s is really very difficult to tell. Again, please don’t accuse me of hoaxing. user:Theroadislong did not make a mistake - this was a good article about a well-known village in northwestern Poland. I should point out again that the article was in the top 25 good new drafts for over a week with no problems. If however, Theroadislong did not conform to article approval protocol when he/she accepted the page, then perhaps they should have those rights taken away to prevent future mistakes. Thank you. Vilamich (talk) 20:05, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No reviewer's rights are going to be taken away because of this issue. I suggest that you focus on sorting out the issue with your proposed article, and less on what other editors do or have done to them. General Ization ^Talk 20:09, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Duly noted, I will take heed of this. Also, General, something you said earlier certainly caught my attention: you mentioned that you would “request” that I be blocked. Are you not an administrator or have blocking powers? Just curious, because I had the impression initially that you are in a position of power here on English Wikipedia. Vilamich (talk) 20:12, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an administrator; merely an editor who has been working here for more than 12 years and has made more than 103,000 edits, so knows a little about how things work here. I am also a rollbacker, which means that one of my tasks here is to detect and revert vandalism (and apparent vandalism). General Ization ^Talk 20:15, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It’s odd that you can cite such impressive stats, yet you are not an administrator. Have you tried to become an administrator before? And also, is being a rollbacker like being an administrator? I am just curious to know about the hierarchy on Wikipedia. Like for example, are user rights basically a substitute for actual power for editors who can’t be admins? Vilamich (talk) 20:24, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please focus on the matter at hand. If you are interested in learning about administrative tasks and roles at Wikipedia, there are various pages that will enlighten you, but that is not the reason for this discussion. General Ization ^Talk 01:21, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you're referring to when you mention "the top 25 good new drafts", but the issue was a lack of sources. If this really is a well-known village, why does its name return no results on Google? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:20, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cordless Larry, it is well known among local Poles, most of whom in this area do not have have internet access. Vilamich (talk) 20:24, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Local Poles don't need to have internet access for this village to be listed in some directory somewhere online. 331dot (talk) 20:28, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 331dot, thank you for your comment. I don’t understand. Does this mean that if something isn’t on an online directory, then it doesn’t exist? Thank you again for your patience, I am still getting used to how Wikipedia works, thank you and cheers Vilamich (talk) 20:30, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It needs to be documented in a published source. That source doesn't need to be available online, but I can't believe that there are villages in Poland that don't show on maps or have any mentions online - regardless of whether their inhabitants have internet access. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:36, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi user:Cordless Larry Perhaps I will have to visit the Kesznick Town Hall, constructed in 1897, to inquire about online records of the town. Regardless, I will refrain from pursuing this until I have the information that you require as an administrator in order to decide on this matter. Thank you Vilamich (talk) 20:45, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I also notice that you have a doctoral degree and allow me to thank you for your service to the health of mankind. The practice of medicine is a taxing profession, and I certainly appreciate your efforts. Vilamich (talk) 20:48, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A PhD isn't a medical degree, Vilamich, and it's not because I'm an administrator here that you need to provide reliable sources, but rather because it's a requirement of one of Wikipedia's core policies, WP:VERIFY. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:55, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies @Cordless Larry: I assumed you were a real doctor. I understand and again, I will refrain from pursuing this matter until I can provide sources according to the Wikipedia policy. Thank you Vilamich (talk) 21:02, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) The point that many users have tried to tell you is that your word that this village exists is not sufficient. We need an independent reliable source of some kind indicating that it exists. It doesn't have to be online, but it needs to be verifiable. Someone has produced a satellite image of your claimed coordinates of the village and there appears to be nothing there. That is strong evidence against what you claim. You will have to produce some sort of evidence indicating that it exists. This could be a census conducted by the Polish government, election results, businesses located there, anything more than your word. As an encyclopedia, verifiability is an important principle here. 331dot (talk) 20:41, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived[edit]

Hi Vilamich! You created a thread called When will my draft be approved? 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) 19:00, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018[edit]

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

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 why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

- TNT ^💖 22:59, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]