Uporabniški pogovor:Spoananung

Vsebina strani ni podprta v drugih jezikih.
Iz Wikipedije, proste enciklopedije

Sem odblokiral preimenovani uporabniški račun. Vseeno prosim, da se vzdržiš pisanja o lastnih teorijah in projektih - skladno s pravili: Wikipedija:Konflikt interesov, Wikipedija:Nepristranskost in Wikipedija:Preverljivost. Hvala. — Yerpo Ha? 09:41, 24. november 2022 (CET)[odgovori]

Lep pozdrav
Bom pisail v Slovenščini če smem. Z ozirom da sem blokiran s strani administratorja Acroterion,
bi želel podati nekaj svojih razmišljanj in argumentov. Ne strinjam se z očitkom da želim promovirati svoje podjete itn. kajti pri P.S.A.i.K. company Therapiji gre za gibanje imenovano družabna terapija in ne za družbo (company kot takšno). Ne strinjam se tudi z načinom komunikacije z administrarorji in njihovo subjektivnostjo pri odločanju o primernosti člankov brez nadzora supervizorja. Tudi tematika članka se navezuje nasplošno na zgodovino nastanka gibanja in nima nićesar skupnega s spodaj omenjenimi očitki. Želel bi tudi povezavo do nadzorne komisije.na Wikipediji. Hvala za razumevanje! Spoananung
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about
mistakes to avoid
when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Wikipedia cannot reference itself.
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
after they have been resolved
.
Theroadislong
(
talk
) 16:28, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi.
As you will find out. I made some edits on my Wikipedia page Spoananung. For the future I don't see anymore much reasons about subject discussion around named article.
From my point of view is article correct. Also I don't give much on by your opinion in-depth and independence of the subject, since my article is based on fact truth and not on left media fake news.
I also believe Wikipedia give more space and freedom to less objective contents, so this is it from my point of view. Maybe Teahouse will be more understanding, Best Regards Spoananung (talk) 21:05, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Spoananung! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Theroadislong (talk) 16:28, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Spoananung (November 30)
Your recent article submission to
Articles for Creation
has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about
mistakes to avoid
when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Sites Google and Wikipedia are NOT reliable sources.
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
after they have been resolved
.
Spoananung (pogovor) 16:17, 2. december 2022 (CET)[odgovori]
You have been
blocked
indefinitely
from editing because your account is being used only for
advertising or promotion
.
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 ~~~~}}.  Acroterion (talk) 00:20, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi Acroterion!
I don't believe anymore in objectivity of Wikipedia, and don't see any differences between my article and for example this one. I understand there needs to be some principles and rules, but then they must be for all of us.
You will not convince me in attachment here is no advertising or promotion.That's why I don't understand what are you trying to impose. This is my last try for publishing on Wikipedia. Best Regards Spoananung (talk) 04:52, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Spoananung (pogovor) 16:21, 2. december 2022 (CET)[odgovori]
Vzorec argumentiranja je pogost kot pri drugih samopromotorjih. Če meniš, da ne zadostuje kriterijem WP:POM/WP:NPOV, ga predlagaj za brisanje (WP:PZB). Poleg tega je vsaka Wiki svoja skupnost in bomo slovenski admini težko komentirali akcije angleških adminov, kajti na enwiki je bistveno več pravil kot pri nas. A09|(pogovor) 22:55, 2. december 2022 (CET)[odgovori]
A09 hvala za odgovor. Kar me moti pri Wikipediji je, da daje absolutno moč in oblast enemu posamezniku, volonterju, v tem primeru  Acroterion - Menim namreč, da omenjeni nima pravice soditi povšalno, avtoritarno o primernosti in neprimernosti članka. To ne sodi v demokracijo. S tem vprašanjem se med drugim ukvarja tudi tematika Atmonavti projekta v poglavju Jerk off 5:49 sec. V kolikor bi predlagal članek za brisanje (WP:PZB) bi to pomenilo, da se strinjam z ravnanjem omenjenega. Res je, da članek na začetku morda ni bil primeren, ker ni bil dodelan v peskovniku sandbox-u, vendar način kako se nekoga blokira za nedoločen čas ni demokratičen in objektiven. Spoananung (pogovor) 11:56, 3. december 2022 (CET)[odgovori]
Pridobljeno iz »https://sl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Uporabniški_pogovor:Spoananung&oldid=5845123«