User talk:Dankonikolic

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome[edit]

Hi, Dankonikolic. Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like it here and decide to stick around. If you see something on Wikipedia that you want to change, just press the edit button and change it!

For the basic principles, see the five pillars of Wikipedia. And if you're ready to make some edits, this Wikipedia cheatsheet may come in handy.

Cheers, ChzzBot IV (talk) 12:32, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

I noticed your submission in Articles for creation, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Ideasthesia. Thanks! It will be reviewed by a volunteer soon.

Before it can be added to Wikipedia, your submission should have references. All articles on Wikipedia should have inline, numbered references after facts, showing the 'reliable source' (a newspaper, book, etc.) where the information can be checked, so that all information is verifiable.

Here's a video tutorial - hit play, then right-click for "full screen".

Here's an example of how to add references:

Chzz is 98 years old.<ref> The Book of Chzz, Aardvark Books, 2009. </ref>

He likes tea.<ref> Smith, John. "[http://foonews.com/Article42 Interview with Chzz]", Foo News, 1 April 2010. Retrieved 2011-05-22. </ref>

== References ==

{{reflist}}

That makes the references automatically display as small numbers[1] which will link to the details in the section titled == References == at the end. You can see that example in action here.

Please add references to your submission, which will be reviewed as soon as possible. See also, Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. If you need any help, just put {{helpme}} at the end of this page, followed by a question or get into our live help chat chanel at #wikipedia-en-help connect.

Best, ChzzBot IV (talk) 12:32, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.


Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! France3470 (talk) 13:40, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Aaron Booth (talk) 05:27, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Ideasthesia, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-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 are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Pol430 talk to me 14:49, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! FeralOink (talk) 14:28, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tesla[edit]

Hi

Sorry, I reverted your addition to the Tesla article. We don't speculate in articles, or give our own opinions, unless they are supported by a reliable source, which you didn't provide. I took a look at Ideasthesia before reverting your edit, to see if I could understand the concept, but that's a quite poorly sourced article too - seeming mostly to suggest it might be something different, but most of the sources seem to refer to synesthesia instead. Perhaps the concept is more established and less speculative than I can tell from my quick look, though. I couldn't see, either, how what is described there would apply in Tesla's case. Of course, that's my opinion, and worth no more than yours - but neither of our opinions matter in articles, because that would be original research, and we must not do that - just report what reliable sources have said. Begoon talk 13:43, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Nikola Tesla[edit]

Hi

I moved our discussion to Talk:Nikola Tesla#Synesthesia/Ideasthesia(link), to get wider input. Please continue the discussion there. Thank you for your patience and openness in the discussion so far. Hopefully it can reach a good resolution there. Begoon talk 14:08, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This is probably a wise move. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dankonikolic (talk • contribs)
It's the appropriate place to get input from editors who regularly edit that article, so hopefully that will happen. I removed the synesthesia sentence in the meantime.
Just in case I haven't given you enough links, here's some about the procedures and formats for posting on talk pages: WP:INDENT, WP:TPG and WP:SIGN.
That will help you post your comments in the correct format, so that others don't need to reformat your contributions. Basically, if you copy what others have done when you look at their text in the edit window, that should guide you - we indent replies with colons at the start of the line, and sign at the end of our comments with 4 tildes: (~~~~). Doing all this reminds me just how bewildering it must be to a new user - sorry. Begoon talk 14:50, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Scaled correlation concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Scaled correlation, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 19:32, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission Scaled correlation[edit]

Hello Dankonikolic. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Scaled correlation.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Scaled correlation}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. —Anne Delong (talk) 03:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

June 2014[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm WeijiBaikeBianji. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Intelligence because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 16:12, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see we've encountered this issue before. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 20:46, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Repeatedly inserting content you admit promotes your own writings[edit]

Dear Dankonikolic

I see you are continuing to insert an external link into the article Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, an external link that you have acknowledged on my user talk page is "in my interest that people know about my work." Your self-promotion, in my judgment as an experienced editor of Wikipedia who studies the professional literature on psychological testing, is a violation of Wikipedia's content guideline about external links, as the link is a poor fit for an encyclopedia article about that test, and a violation of Wikipedia's behavior guideline on conflict of interest editing. You are welcome to disagree, of course, and I encourage you to take up the matter on the administrator's notice board about edit warring, where I am inviting discussion from you and from uninvolved administrators. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 18:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Artificial intelligence, you may be blocked from editing. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:22, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you.

Edit warring at Wisconsin Card Sorting Test[edit]

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for Edit warring and promotional editing. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

The full report is at WP:AN3#User:Dankonikolic reported by User:WeijiBaikeBianji (Result: Blocked). The fact that you don't appear to understand our WP:COI guideline doesn't give you a license to violate it. EdJohnston (talk) 21:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dankonikolic. I have noticed that despite being blocked last September for violations of wikipedia's conflict of interest policies you have continued to engage in promotional editing. Most egregiously, you have continued to add external links to your own personal website (e.g. here, here, and here). Please stop this and other promotional editing. Also note that you risk further sanctions. Regards Andrew (talk) 02:23, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Practopoiesis[edit]

The article Practopoiesis has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I debated speedying this under A11, since it only seems to appear in works by the user who created the article, but I'll elaborate further and note that the cited sources, other than ones authored by the user himself, don't actually mention this concept, and despite the creator's posting about his theory all over the internet, it nonetheless appears to be a hobbyhorse of one individual.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:59, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Practopoiesis for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Practopoiesis 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/Practopoiesis 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. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:18, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok then. Delete it. I am guilty of the crime. I guess I will have to wait until practopoiesis gets more famous and more often used by other authors. I will try deleting it myself but I am not sure whether I know how to do it. (Danko Nikolic) Update: I have deleted it.

Your GA nomination of Ideasthesia[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ideasthesia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 12:22, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Ideasthesia[edit]

The article Ideasthesia you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Ideasthesia for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 14:01, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Ideasthesia[edit]

The article Ideasthesia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ideasthesia for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 21:01, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Ideasthesia[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Ideasthesia at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:43, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Danko, please check the nomination; your recent edits to the article did not resolve the issues. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:06, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GAR notification[edit]

Ideasthesia, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:25, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. ElKevbo (talk) 11:06, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have left you some questions[edit]

Hello User:Dankonikolic, there were some questions I had for you, over at this page -- WP:Articles_for_deletion/Practopoiesis_(2nd_nomination). You can reply to me there if you like, or if you are not sure what I'm asking, you can leave a note on User_talk:75.108.94.227 in a new section for me. Thanks, 75.108.94.227 (talk) 21:14, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to answer them today. Thank you very much for taking the interest and investing the effort. (Danko (talk) 12:44, 30 September 2015 (UTC))[reply]
No problem, thanks for helping wikipedia get better content.  :-)     Feel free to leave a note on my usertalk, if you have questions or concerns, about this AfD in particular, or just whatever-in-general. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 13:40, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In case you did not see it, I've left you some more questions at User_talk:75.108.94.227#Practopoiesis_2. Let me know if you'd rather talk with somebody less verbose.  ;-)     But I think we are getting close to knowing what we need to know, so that practopoiesis can be slotting into the 'pedia in a reasonable location. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 14:50, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so I have moved our discussion to a new location -- Draft_talk:Practopoiesis#continuation_of_merge-discussion. The result at the AfD was, quote "needs additional expert discussion". Because we are no longer under the AfD-imposed arbitrary deadlines, we can figure out how best to position the material with WP:NORUSH. Also, as a bonus, because we are no longer restricted by the arbitrary AfD over-sensitivity about wikiprojects that are not 'officially' compatible with WP:DS syntax, I will leave a note at the talkpage of the neuroscience wikiproject. Point being, please don't be discouraged. The close was not the final word, it was just a move-this-elsewhere type of action. We are free to continue on as we were, and can revisit the outcome with User:Sandstein and User:JzG, once we've got a better grip on what an ideal outcome would have been, given infinite patience. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 21:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

as far as I can tell the IP is a certain gentleman with a vested interest in popularising the term. The "problem" is that his neologism is no longer a Wikipedia article. Guy (Help!) 23:56, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have just answered the question about Allopoiesis being the most suitable place for Practopoiesis. Thanks for the effort. (Danko (talk) 16:08, 24 October 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) 13:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Dankonikolic. 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]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Practopoiesis (May 2)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Gtstricky was:
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Practopoiesis instead.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Page exists and can be edited.
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.
GtstrickyTalk or C 20:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Chiswick Chap. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:24, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Notes for myself[edit]

WP:HISTMERGE has some information on how to request a merger of page histories; there is also an {{adminhelp}} template you can make use of when you need the help of an admin !link >DankoNikolic +Helpmebot DankoNikolic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:HISTMERGE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:adminhelp

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Dankonikolic. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Dankonikolic. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Dankonikolic. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dankonikolic&oldid=1140682674"