User talk:Wikilaj

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wikilaj on Vladimir Plahotniuc. NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:59, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

Hello, Wikilaj. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Vladimir Plahotniuc, 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) (see the {{request edit}} template);
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. --XXN, 12:00, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Vladimir Plahotniuc, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you. --Gikü (talk) 15:39, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2017 October 27 and 30 Biased editing of Vladimir Plahatniuc

Wikilaj, please stop deleting sources and please stop deleting sourced entries. You may not consider the New York Times or the Daily BEast to be reliable sources, but most users of Wikipedia would recognize these as legitimate sources.

Wikilaj: you need to engage in a dialogue, you cannot simply delete items you do not like.

[This is AlbertPenfold to Wikilaj]: I am engaging in dialogue. Please explain why you do not consider the New York Times or the Daily Beast as reliable sources.

April 2017

I noticed that you have posted comments to the page User talk:Gikü in a language other than English. At the English-language Wikipedia, we try to use English for all comments. Posting all comments in English makes it easier for other editors to join the conversation and help you. If you cannot avoid using another language, then please provide a translation into English, if you can. If you cannot provide a translation, please go to the list of Wikipedias, look in the list for a Wikipedia that is in your language, and edit there instead of here. For more details, see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:40, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

This is your only warning; if you remove or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia again, as you did at Vladimir Plahotniuc, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Patient Zero^talk 14:10, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Patient Zero I have deleted the statements because Wikipedia says: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous." Please you as well to be impartial and to analyze the situation from a neutral point of view.Wikilaj (talk) 14:46, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikilaj. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. Bbb23 (talk) 19:02, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23, NeilN you wrong with your accusation. why clicking on "User compare report" it gives me 404 - not found? do you, guys, abuse of your status to do a negative PR? do you protect edits with a negative connotation? but what about policies? please, take a minute and read in details the article, in your opinion it have a neutral point of view, in the state as it is now? does it respect Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:No original research when people you protect add highlighted subsection that reflects their own opinion, when they add paragraphs with libelous statements to denigrate the subject?

"thank you that you give me the chance to defend myself" by blocking me ))
i want to ask for arbitration, can i do this at this page? Wikilaj (talk) 20:17, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Ban appeals.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:47, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bbb23, NeilN Hello, at this page Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wikilaj you said "Suspected sockpuppets" and attached "User compare report" when I access this link, it returns me a new page with 404 - page not exist. Can i ask you to show me the technical evidence about this Sockpuppet, or you made your conclusion based on behavior and style evaluation? You protected the page Vladimir Plahotniuc in a vandalized state. How can I ask for an evaluation of the page from a neutral person, is there some practices? Have I the right to make such a request if I am accused of Sockpuppet and blocked? Thanks Wikilaj (talk) 16:01, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The user compare report has nothing to do with what checkuser does. You were determined to be socking based on technical evidence which is kept private. You were told how to appeal this finding by Bbb23 above. You may not continue participating in any form in the development of the Plahotniuc article unless your block is lifted. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 16:29, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NeilN Thank you for your quick answer, can i receive this report on my e-mail? But why is this private? Wikipedia should be transparent? Please, to guide me how to lift my block. Thanks Wikilaj (talk) 17:20, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First, you have to disclose all the accounts you've used on Wikipedia. Second, you have to persuade us that you won't use multiple accounts again. Finally, you should address your focus on only one article at Wikipedia and your editing of that article, which is contrary to policy, no matter what your personal opinion is. At this point, you are not an asset to this project, and unless you want to edit constructively in the future, I don't see an unblock in the cards. BTW, if you want to ping a user, you should use the form you used on your first pings of Neil and me. You're linking to our Talk pages. You should link to our userpages, i.e., [[User:Bbb23]].--Bbb23 (talk) 19:46, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]