User talk:Ventus55

Welcome!

Hello, Ventus55, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I notice that one of the first articles you edited 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 any other 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 firm 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.)

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
The five pillars of 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! bobrayner (talk) 01:35, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Justus Wesseler[edit]

I was wondering why you were adding Wesseler as a reference to multiple articles without introducing any new information. It is not a good idea to add a reference without a reason. AIRcorn (talk) 10:47, 17 June 2013 (UTC) The reason is that Wesseler contributed significantly to the subjects to which I referenced his works. Ventus55 (talk) 11:49, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)I think you misunderstand the purpose of references. The purpose of a reference is to back up what has already been said. Once that is done, there is no need to add another reference. That's not to say that if the existing reference does not meet the criteria listed in Wikipedia:Reliable sources it shouldn't be replaced with one that does, nor is it to say that previously-unreferenced text shouldn't have a reliable-source reference that actually backs up the text added to it. However, if you have a conflict of interest, as outlined in Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, you should not add references if doing so would be "editing with a conflict of interest." davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 00:07, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Harald W. Krenn (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Dung

Proboscis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Dung

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

August 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bert Hölldobler may have broken the syntax by modifying 5 "()"s and 2 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:17, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bert Hölldobler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Polymorphism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:01, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bert Hölldobler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page University of Frankfurt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:32, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 13[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bert Hölldobler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Leopoldina (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:06, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Klaus Oeggl, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Austrian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andreas Hierlemann, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Microsystems (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:58, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 11[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andreas Hierlemann, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Volatility (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:16, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Polydactyly, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Notch and Wnt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:01, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Polydactyly, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ectopic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:09, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Please use high quality references per WP:MEDRS such as review articles or major textbooks. Note that review articles are NOT the same as peer reviewed articles. A good place to find medical sources is TRIP database Thanks.

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 01:04, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Denis Duboule, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Colinearity. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Biocrates Life Sciences AG) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Biocrates Life Sciences AG, Ventus55!

Wikipedia editor The Herald just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Good but need some inline cites in the lead section..

To reply, leave a comment on The Herald's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Actually, the page is significantly promotional. I've tagged it as such, and intend to make some cuts, which may amount to most of the article. When we describe a company in a particular field, we do not include general information about the field, or explain why the field is important--we just link to the article. Doing anything more is appropriate or a press release, not an encyclopedia article. We never use words like "renowned" or leading" or similar puffery. We can not say "first" anything without a third party reliable source that makes the claim.

There are indeed a great many WP articles that are similarly promotional, or worse. They were accepted in earlier years when the standards were lower. We need to either upgrade or remove them. The least we can do is not add to their number.

please keep this in mind for writing your articles on scientists also.

I notice that many of the articles are translated from the German, apparently the German WP. That is of course a very good idea, but the source must be specified--it is not enough to make the interwiki link. The way we do it is specified at Wikipedia:Translation You should also be aware of some differences in style. In particular, we do not link or list all of a person's scientific articles, We includes only the few most cited, and support this with citation data , preferably from Web of Science, though Google Scholar will do .

I do some short translations myself, but I have only a ordinary scientist's knowledge of German--if I need help, I'll remember to ask you DGG ( talk ) 15:51, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your assistance. I tried to neutralize the article and deleted some attributes like "significant", "leading" "first". I hope this'll help. Ventus55 (talk) 09:59, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia from the Anatomy Wikiproject![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia from WikiProject Anatomy! We're a group of editors who strive to improve the quality of anatomy articles here on Wikipedia. One of our members has noticed that you are involved in editing anatomy articles; it's great to have a new interested editor on board. In your wiki-voyages, a few things that may be relevant to editing wikipedia articles are:

Thanks for coming aboard! We always appreciate a new editor. Feel free to leave us a message at any time on the WikiProject Anatomy talk page. If you are interested in joining the project yourself, there is a participant list where you can sign up. Please leave a message on the talk page if you have any problems, suggestions, would like review of an article, need suggestions for articles to edit, or would like some collaboration when editing!
You will make a big difference to the quality of information by adding reliable sources. Sourcing anatomy articles is essential and makes a big difference to the quality of articles. And, while you're at it, why not use a book to source information, which can source multiple articles at once!
We try and use a standard way of arranging the content in each article. That layout is here. These headings let us have a standard way of presenting the information in anatomical articles, indicate what information may have been forgotten, and save angst when trying to decide how to organise an article. That said, this might not suit every article. If in doubt, be bold!
We write for a general audience. Every reader should be able to understand anatomical articles, so when possible please write in a simple form—most readers do not understand anatomical jargon. See this essay for more details.

Feel free to contact us on the WikiProject Anatomy talk page if you have any problems, or wish to join us. I wish you all the best on your wiki-voyages!

Your submission at Articles for creation: Christian-Friedrich Vahl has been accepted[edit]

Christian-Friedrich Vahl, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-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. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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!

DGG ( talk ) 19:53, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Joachim Bauer, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-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. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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!

DGG ( talk ) 19:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wolfgang Koenig, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-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. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post 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!

DGG ( talk ) 19:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Alexander Berghaus[edit]

Hi, I'm ONUnicorn. Ventus55, thanks for creating Alexander Berghaus!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. No indication that this meets WP:GNG. Citations are to his own papers, and support statements about his work and research. The biographical section is totally unreferenced.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:36, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest in WIkipedia[edit]

Hi Ventus55. I work on conflict of issues in WIkipedia, along with my regular editing about health and medicine.

Thanks for disclosing User:Ventus55#Notice that you are compensated for some of your editing. Under the WP:PAID policy, which simply reflects the Terms of Use, you are obligated to disclose the specific articles for which you have received compensation. Typically we ask people to list them on their User page and disclose that on the Talk page of the relevant article as well.

If you would list the relevant articles on your Userpage, I will do the work of tagging the Talk pages.

Additionally, there is a second step to managing conflicts of interest here on en-wiki, after disclosure -- namely, peer review. Once you disclose on your Userpage, I can walk you through the peer review step.

I'm providing you with notice of our COI guideline and PAID policy, just so you have this.

Hello, Ventus55. 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 COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) for peer review (see the {{request edit}} template);
if you want to create an article about a topic for which you have a COI, please submit a draft for peer review using the articles for creation process, with a disclosure of your COI on the Talk page;
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.

Further discussion[edit]

But please do reply here after you've posted the list on your Userpage, and then I'll reply to you with a quick description of the peer review process. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 13:49, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. Plesae see marks "compensated" for the relevant articles on my user page. There is no COI.Ventus55 (talk) 15:51, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I don't understand what you mean by "there is no COI" - would you please explain? Also would you please explain what was going on here: User:Kipepea/PICSO_Impulse_System which ended up as Pressure-controlled intermittent coronary sinus occlusion (PICSO)? That looks like a lot like a paid article. Also, this does too: Biocrates Life Sciences AG..... Sorry to bother you, just trying to sort things out. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 16:35, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

With "no COI" I'm saying "I do not have any personal relationship with the peoples I'm writing about", when I was exceptionally compensated. I understand that a COI can be seen by Wikipedia, but I'm saying on my user page: "articles are not biased or overweighted in what these people performed in their discipline or life". I'm not involved in "PICSO" and there is no compensation for "Biocrates". Ventus55 (talk) 16:51, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying. Sorry for not being more clear - is Kipepea an alternative account for you?

Also, getting compensated = COI in Wikipedia. It is great that you strive to be neutral even when you have a COI: it doesn't change the fact that there is a COI. This is not ambiguous.

In the future, for editing where you are compensated or expect to be compensated, please don't edit directly, but rather propose changes on the Talk page and if it is a new article, please put it through WP:AFC, in both cases with a disclosure. OK? Jytdog (talk) 16:59, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Thanks for helping me.Ventus55 (talk) 17:09, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for being understanding, and for disclosing so readily. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 18:41, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to circle back but were you paid by the three individuals or by some other entity? These details are required by the ToU and the paid contributor tag. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 18:46, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By the individuals.Ventus55 (talk) 19:43, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

great thanks. Jytdog (talk) 21:05, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Kai von Klitzing[edit]

A tag has been placed on Kai von Klitzing requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 17:36, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:User:Ventus55/Kai von Klitzing[edit]

This page has an extra "user" in the page title. You probably want to move the page somewhere else. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:38, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 21 July[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Wagner's gene network model page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Ventus55. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Martinus Richter[edit]

Was this a compensated article? Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 19:38, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. Ventus55 (talk) 19:40, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I always find it ... fishy when someone's professional page links to the Wikipedia article about themselves, like this page does. You created the article at de-WP that is linked there. And the page here is pretty a much a direct translation of that page. Hm. Jytdog (talk) 20:02, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

with edits like this your claim of having no COI here is wearing very thin. Jytdog (talk) 22:14, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:COIN[edit]

This section Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#User:Ventus55_relay

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 16:13, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PAID[edit]

You will need to follow this including:

1) Indicating who paid for what articles 2) State any intermediaries involved

Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:05, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I started to do so. Please see my user page. Ok this way? Ventus55 (talk) 18:06, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

odd page move[edit]

You wrote the article on Wolfgang Koenig as User:Ventus55/Wolfgang Koenig ; I cleaned it up and accepted it for main space, but you moved it back to your user space. I am puzzled why. DGG ( talk ) 04:46, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing[edit]

Hello, This is to inform you that i filed a formal complaint regarding paid editing here: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Ventus_again Best --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:30, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns[edit]

Here Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:22, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. 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 ~~~~}}. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:21, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doc James. Please help me to understand correctly why I'm blocked and which multiple account abusing you see. I'm definitely interested in following the WP-rules correctly.Ventus55 (talk) 15:39, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at the link above...TJH2018 talk 15:40, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. And now to the cleanup :-( Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:41, 17 October 2017 (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).

Ventus55 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have no socket puppetry here in WP. I'm not aware of any abusing of multiple accounts. Please help me to understand which concrete cases you mean. Otherwise I can't follow your argumentation, but I want to understand what's going wrong and how I can improve my work here. User:Kipepea (Vienna) is not identical with me (User:ventus55) (Munich) and not a sockpuppet of Ventus55 or vice versa. I know Kipepea personally, we know from each other's work. In the case of the article "Pressure-controlled intermittent coronary sinus occlusion (PICSO)" both of us have edited, but only one of us was compensated. This is exactly what should be stated on one of our user sites. We avoided supporting each others in debates. What did we wrong? Please help. Regards

Ventus55 (talk) 15:50, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Declined. Please defer future unblock inquiries directly to UTRS. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 19:51, 17 October 2017 (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.

So you were collaborating on a paid job? But just you got paid?

And where do you disclose regarding Pressure-controlled intermittent coronary sinus occlusion (PICSO)?

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:38, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Both of you having the same edit pattern (No edit summary, short additions to articles, same text style, etc.) on both wikis, and you supported each other on dewp (example). And on dewp's userpage of Kipepea is a statement regarding payed editing as well. Last but not least: The CheckUser speaks for itelf. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:00, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ventus55: CheckUser is a tool that provides technical evidence to determine if two or more accounts are being operated by one individual or group of people. According to the evidence that CheckUser has provided about this account and Kipepea, the admins have determined that was the case for these accounts. That, plus the behavioural evidence detailed above, was considered as conclusive evidence of sockpuppetry. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:04, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So I was hoodwinked by the Kipepea account. They disclosed their paid editing on DE WP[1] yet were claiming to a female grad student here in their unblock request.[2] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:06, 18 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Ventus55 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #19521 was submitted on Oct 18, 2017 09:30:30. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 09:30, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The connections are a little more than you admit to, however. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:29, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alexander Berghaus for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alexander Berghaus is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander Berghaus until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. RexxS (talk) 18:14, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hans Konrad Biesalski[edit]

The article Hans Konrad Biesalski has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No named chair, or other indications of WP:NACADEMIC; no secondary sources to support GNG either.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ☆ Bri (talk) 12:41, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Björn Dirk Krapohl) has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Björn Dirk Krapohl, Ventus55!

Wikipedia editor Abishe just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Need to improve the quality of the article in a better way.

To reply, leave a comment on Abishe's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Abishe (talk) 02:09, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation[edit]

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ventus55, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Steinsplitter (talk) 12:01, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Kai von Klitzing for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kai von Klitzing is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kai von Klitzing until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. Geoff | ^{Who, me?} 18:12, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Justus Wesseler for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Justus Wesseler is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justus Wesseler until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 11:54, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]