User talk:Msluka

Martin: I've put in some links and the infobox on Therion (software). I'll let you upload stuff like the screenshot and so on. Unless they are specific to the program, I'd lose all those boring sections on file formats, and instead replace it with more of an introduction of what therion does -- eg with some visual examples of what is meant by scraps, and how they are joined up. Use examples of real caves which we can show parts of and link to. eg Charterhouse Cave.Goatchurch 23:56, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Msluka, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• 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)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion 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! WTucker (talk) 13:55, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Therion (software)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Therion (software), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Night of the Big Wind _talk 14:25, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011

Hello Msluka. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Therion (software), you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about following the reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 18:54, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello Mr. Watson

I really don´t understand the reason you deleted the article about Therion (software).

• affiliated: I really don't understand what it means. To write an article about something I MUST be affiliated with it. If I'm not what I may to write? In wikispeach it means that only Innuits may write article about palmas? Or what?
• conflict of interest: what could be "conflict of interest" - if I wrote an article about software I was dreaming 25 years. I use it in may hobby, it is free, it is not any subject of bussines activity of anybody.
• neutral point of view: if in article is not any one word false or incorrect, if there is only minimal amount of informations necessary to understand what for the software is, there is no any one comparison with similar products, what may be more neutral?
• reliable source: I asked before - is the printed article "reliable source"? Is an article from a magazine published by the professional company "reliable source"? Or is an article from proceedings of big internation symposium "reliable source"? What it means "reliable source".
• our frequently asked questions for organizations: the authors and users of Therion (software) are not in any case "organisation". The authors are freelancers, users are hapy users, because something from their long dreams is now reality.

I feel now like in old time of communist here in Czech Republic. I was punished because somebody made a decision but I absolutely don't understand the reason. In that time no any official was interesting if what I'm doing is correct or not, but the most important was if my grandfather 50 years ago was in right political party. Msluka (talk) 12:30, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Msluka, JamesBWatson may respond here, too; but, I want to say something since we have had a few discussions on the Therion talk page over the last few weeks. I think the problem was that the article seemed to be simply promoting the use of Therion software and not providing an informative, encyclopedic article in keeping with Wikipedia's purposes. Had there been a number of reliable, third party sources for the article, the promotional tone of it could have been dampened; but, there simply were not any reliable third party sources (well, one which I found) talking about the software itself. The article should not be a "how to" describing how to use the software nor a promotional list of its features. Any article should tell why the subject is notable and prove it by citing reliable sources which discuss those notable aspects of the subject. Therion is just not notable, yet and so there is nothing to say, and no way to prove it anyway. And, there is no need to be an expert in a subject in order to write about it. Wikipedia editors read reliable sources and write what they say, not what they know from their own knowledge or experience. I hope this helps. I tried to explain that this was going to happen and even tried to find reliable sources to prevent it; but, I could not. I hope that you will not let this discourage you from editing Wikipedia in the future. Just use it as an opportunity to learn. Remember, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an advertising or promotional medium. Happy editing. WTucker (talk) 05:00, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi WTucker, I graduated analytical chemistry on university and from that time I'm writing an article only about things which I know enough to be able to understand it well. So sorry, it was misunderstanding. I tried to write those article about Therion (software) as neutral as I was able to did it. OK, it looked as promotion. It is quite difficult to write about something as complex as Therion (software) is in few sentences. If somebody say: the program XYZ is CAD program, everybody is able to find definition of CAD programs and read, what the CAD program is and what is able to do. If the description of CAD functionality would be part of article about XYZ software - it would be promotion too. But there is simply no any article (reliable third party source) one may find about something as Therion (software). That is the main problem. OK, Wikipedia has its own rules, so I'll stop defend my former article. The pity is, that Therion (software) is cited in two or more articles on Wikipedia itself an on several link pages of speleological groups and organizations. So a something small should be here. Probably first paragraph of my article with link on page of Therion (software) and one or two links to "list of cave surveying software" as "reliable sources". Is this possible? Msluka (talk) 07:11, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• It is certainly not true that one must be affiliated with a subject in order to write about it. I have not written a large number of articles, but among those I have written are three about writers. Each of those came about in the following way. I came across a writer or their writing, and thought it would be interesting to know more about the writer, so I looked on Wikipedia. I found there was no article about that writer, so instead I searched around elsewhere to find information about the person. Once I had done that I thought that it might help other people who wanted to know about the same person if I collected together some of what I had been able to find, and put it together into one article for Wikipedia. I have absolutely no affiliation with any of any of the people involved, nor do I have any reason for wanting to publicise them. A good many Wikipedia articles come about in similar ways, written by someone with no personal involvement in the subject.
• The article was nominated for speedy deletion by Night of the Big Wind, who was of the opinion that it was promoting the software. In my opinion it did show some signs of being written with the intention of publicising the software, though it was not as blatantly promotional as many articles I have seen. If that had been the only consideration, I would have regarded it as close to the borderline for speedy deletion. However, that was not the only consideration, as I found that it was substantially a copy of a document to be found elsewhere on the internet, which suggests that it is a copyright infringement. It may be that the writers of the document have released it into the public domain, or have licensed it under a free license consistent with Wikipedia's terms, but I can see no evidence that that is so, and we cannot simply assume that it is, since many people come to Wikipedia and post material in violation of copyright.
• In the course of communicating about Wikipedia, particularly to new editors, it is frequently necessary to repeat a lot of the same things which have been said many times before. Time taken in doing so is time taken away from doing other work for Wikipedia, so we often use prefabricated messages, rather than writing new ones each time. Sometimes the exact wording of such a ready made message are not ideal for a particular case. You have object to the use of the word “organisation” in reference to the group relating to “Therion” in which you are active. However, whether the group is or is not organised is irrelevant: the point is that it is a group in which you are involved. Sometimes this involves a company, sometimes a band, a club, a school, and so on: “organisation” is an attempt to cover them all. If you feel that the group in question is too loose to be called an “organisation” then perhaps you would like to re-read the text in question substituting some other word you regard as more appropriate (“group” for example). How organised or disorganised the group is is not the point. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:15, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello Mr. Watson, these are rules of Wikipedia. OK. But according these rules we as humans never discovered fire, because there was not a "reliable third party source" of what the fire is for, the man who experimented with fire was absolutely "affiliated with a subject" and the people frying first piece of meat were "organization" and they "promoting" the fire by smile of meat. I forgot add: it was unambiguous infringement of copyright of Gods. It is clear now what is my meaning? I believe that to build up Wikipedia without such rules was not possible. But it is very very strange for me. BTW: (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: of http://wookware.org/files/tharticle2.odt; - that documents was cited in my article, there was link to PDF version and ref to printed material where it was published. Pictures for the wiki article were made by Martin Budaj. It is very difficult to make copyright infringement of his own copyright. :o) Msluka (talk) 10:43, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Anyway: are the first three paragraphs acceptable?:

Therion is a open source cave surveying software package which is designed to: process survey data; generate maps or 3D models of caves; and archive the data describing the cave and the history of exploration.

• I spent quite a time composing the above message to you, in the hope it might help to make things clearer for you. I wouldn't have wasted my time on it had I known you would just respond with nonsense. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:09, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

It was joke. OK, no jokes on Wikipedia. As you wrote: "I spent quite a time composing the above message to you" and "I though personally I regard the copyright problem as the more important reason for deletion". It is clear you don't want to understand me and I'm not able to understand you. If you "spent quite a time" and found the article on Wookey's page you should found this link too: 10 of the Best Free Linux Earth Science Software. The copyright problem is really nonsense because how it could be "the copyright problem" if author of main part of text and all pictures in former article on Wikipedia is the same man who is coauthor of article you found on Wookey's page. BTW, the link to the original article in PDF form was part of references. My first language is not English as you surely recognized. I think it is better to use in article on Wikipedia corrected english text, than write it from scratch by my "Czenglich" and lost time of somebody who will corrects them. Wookey was the person who corrected the Martin Budaj's and Stacho Mudrak's article, and this is the reason you found it on his page. It is your reason not to have an article (as short as you want) describing one of the 10 of the Best Free Linux Earth Science Software on Wikipedia. And I'm sure this is reliable third party and not affiliated resource. But a bit promotional, so it wasn't among links in former article. Msluka (talk) 11:17, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Why is it clear that I don't want to understand you? Why, if that is so, did I take the trouble to write the fairly long message above, to try to help you? If I don't want to understand you then couldn't I have just ignored you?

We have no evidence, apart from your word, that the author of the text was the person who posted a copy of it to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, in a web site that anyone can edit, we do get people making false claims, so we can't just take the word of anonymous people who choose to edit Wikipedia. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:26, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but is there any way to write neutral, .... article about Therion software? My name is Martin Sluka. If you look anywhere on net you´ll find me connected with Therion software. The explanation is very simple: Martin Budaj and Stacho Mudrák are authors and are working on development. Im something as "speaker". So Mr. Budaj was author of text and pictures in former article. But I published it. Is there something wrong? The short article is about Therion (software). About what else to write the article will be encyklopedic? 82.100.63.154 (talk) 23:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC) Msluka (talk) 16:09, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Description

Therion was developed by Slovakian cavers Martin Budaj and Stacho Mudrak but is available in English. It runs on a wide variety of platforms including Linux, Windows and Mac OS X.

It is completely free, released under the terms of GNU GPL, with source code available. It does not require any other commercial software to run. The format of all files is human readable plain text (excluding 3D models). Therion is available as part of standard distribution of Debian and Ubuntu (operating system) Linux distributions.

Links: Cave survey, http://geography.lancs.ac.uk/matienzo/maps_photos.htm, http://www.ubss.org.uk/links.php, http://www.peach.dreab.com/p-Cave_survey, http://suss.caves.org.au/bulletins/bulls/v4150/bull_48-4_color.pdf pg. 16, http://www.karst.org/pgrotto/cave_links_a.htm, http://network.speleogenesis.info/directory/links/index.php, http://userpages.monmouth.com/~dmajor/Links/caving.html, http://www.linuxlinks.com/article/20110401180655303/EarthScience.html (10 of the Best Free Linux Earth Science Software), etc. Msluka (talk) 11:52, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Your request for undeletion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that a response has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion regarding a submission you made. The thread is Therion (software). JohnCD (talk) 11:38, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 16:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Msluka. 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)