User talk:可愛い

Welcome!

Hello, 可愛い, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Belarus High Technologies Park did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or in other media. Always remember to provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.

If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask a question on your talk page. Again, welcome. Julietdeltalima (talk) 18:46, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Julietdeltalima! 可愛い (talk) 18:53, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

November 2018

Hello, I'm Jim1138. I noticed that in this edit to Viktor Prokopenya, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jim1138 talk 07:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! User:Jim1138 I explained the deletion of content on the talk page. Please read this.

The article was updated according to recent facts. The article was made more consistent with the Russian language version, as the majority of sources are in Russian. Information that was written in a tabloid style was deleted, as well as redundant information, not corresponding to WP:NOTEVERYTHING, WP:UNDUE. Changes were made to contribute to the neutral style of the article. Grammar changes.

“Attempt to purchase bank” section.

Had to delete excessive information, as added information is redundant, this includes excessive facts and commentaries, related to the deal, as well as to other bids to purchase Sberbank Ukraine.

“Criticism and controversies” section

Had to delete this section due to the following reasons: 1. Re. education dispute. Prokopenya's education was questioned by one person in a Facebook post. The Facebook discussion was then published on probusiness.by. Tiny-minority views need not be included, except in the articles devoted to them. Wikipedia is not a forum for discussions on what is the best educational program. 2. Re. conflict with S. Chaly. According to WP:BLPCOI: Wikipedia articles concerning living persons may include material—where relevant, properly weighted, and reliably sourced—about controversies or disputes in which the article subject has been involved. Wikipedia is not a forum provided for parties to off-wiki disputes to continue their hostilities. 3. Re. Instagram followers and comments that “brains are new tits”. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a tabloid outlet. 4. Re. commentaries re. restaurant. WP:NOTEVERYTHING: A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject.

“Critics” section

Changed title, as sections titles need to be neutral. According to the rule WP:BLPCRIME A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. According to Wiki rules, participants should be careful when adding information about contemporaries, be sensitive and strictly follow US laws. We can not use word “arrest” or “arrested” in situations when there has been no court decision. This can be applied only to guilty people. See extensive commentaries on the situation by Belarus lawyers. ^[1] WP:NOTEVERYTHING: Deleted redundant information and opinions, some not relevant to the subject of the article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid outlet. The deletion of information raised discussion re. the right to be forgotten, due to the fact Prokopenya has EU citizenship. ^[2]

可愛い (talk) 07:49, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

Notice of edit warring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Viktor Prokopenya. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jim1138 talk 08:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank. Let's find a consensus. War is bad. I like peaceful communication User talk:Jim1138 可愛い (talk) 08:12, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Viktor Prokopenya

Please, stop whitewashing the article. Your inserts into sections dedicated to one issue of unrelated info with a purpose to diffuse the topic and to change the header of a section are obvious. You literally insert some garbage into the section -> then insist on changing the title which is whitewashing -> then you delete your undesirable text from the section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.222.84.189 (talk) 07:53, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An extended welcome

Hi 可愛い. Welcome to Wikipedia. I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Ronz (talk) 19:07, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ronz thank you! 可愛い (talk) 19:12, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Complaint about you at the edit warring noticeboard

Please see this complaint about you at the edit warring noticeboard. It concerns your edits of Viktor Prokopenya. You may wish to respond at the noticeboard. There is also a question as to how you have managed to edit '40 biographies' when your current account has not worked on so many articles. Any clarity you can offer will be welcome, as will any mention of other accounts you may have used. If multiple accounts are publically declared that is usually enough to clear up the problem. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 22:43, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

dear EdJohnston (talk) Please help resolve this issue.

Belbrabas has made several vandal changes to the page. He does not look like a real user, doesn’t have any edits on other pages, except related to Prokopenya. He is one of the haters of Prokopenya and is editing the article and is making a number of vandal and wiki rules noncompliant edits of the page. He is not interested in making wikipedia page look neutral and compliant with rules, - all he wants is to add a few false or tabloid style statements to the article. As a person who was engaged in major revision of this page I’ve seen Belbrabas’s vandal changes - cancelled them, provided detailed explanation why he is wrong. You can check the discussion page - all his vandal changes were addresses and explained why his changes are wrong. He wants to add to the page phrases, which are completely incompatible with wiki like: “tits are new brains” and things like that. He is adding information about discussion about differences between swiss and US universities to the page, which is completely irrelevant for the biography of a businessperson. Belbrabas is trying to change detention to arrest, while this is not true and was clearly addressed on the comments page. There was incorrect reported by some media initially, when some media called the case arrest, while it was detention. News about detention was republished by various media. However, then, when they understood that that was wrong most of media outlets have changed arrest to detention. Belbrabas takes the last 1% of sources, which haven’t changed the arrest to detention and tries to change the page based on that and ignores the fact that 99% of media outlets have changed their texts to detention - as it is the correct legal term to what have happened. You can see more information describing that on the page comments.

Using the incorrect term “arrest” instead of “detention” by some media outlets resulted in the fact that many of these outlets then corrected it. Some of them even deleted articles with the incorrect term usage. Now most of them use it correctly. Here are the links [1] One more. As I mentioned before, if you are referring to the DW article, their use was also incorrect.. Further, you should note that, in an article published at a later date, they correctly used the word “detention» [2].

The article by Vice News is not a good example to justify the use of the word “arrest”, as it refers to other articles that no longer exist. It is perfectly viable that “arrest” was also used incorrectly in those articles, and therefore the relevant publication removed the article from the public view. As such, we cannot rely on the Vice News article as proof that term “arrest” is acceptable in this situation.

It is absolutely vital that, when media organisations – including journalists – and Wikipedia editors write about legal issues, they use the correct legal language to do so.

He is writing about his disagreement with death penalty discussion for the first time. He never pointed out that on the comments page.

Belbrabas doesn’t understand that wikipedia is about neutrality and all he does in the discussions is incorrectly accused me of being connected to Viktor Prokopenya. He thinks that being neutral means connected. He haven’t provided any other arguments on my feedback and doesn’t participate in the discussion as you can see on the discussion page. I am not connected to Viktor Prokopenya and I don’t have a conflict of interest. While Belbrabas is clearly connected to Viktor Prokopenya - he is one of his haters and is biased, thus, can’t edit wikipedia in accordance with Wikipedia rules. As he haven’t answered any of my feedback provided on the discussion page, I am returning the page back to my version, as it contained loads of other changes. 可愛い (talk) 09:25, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

dear EdJohnston (talk) In Russian Wikipedia, I edit the biographies of entrepreneurs. I edited more than 40 biographies of entrepreneurs in the Russian [Wikipedia] 可愛い (talk) 09:37, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at WP:AIV, you may be blocked from editing. DO NOT DELETE MY REPORTS! CLCStudent (talk) 21:58, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CLCStudent What do you mean? I haven't changed anything there. You probably missed the user. 可愛い (talk) 07:08, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This [[3]] is what I am talking about. CLCStudent (talk) 13:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

April 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for WP:OUTING.

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 ~~~~}}.

I have deleted the edits which contained personal information. EdJohnston (talk) 13:27, 24 April 2019 (UTC) [reply]

You have been blocked from editing for abuse of editing privileges in relation to information which has been removed from Wikipedia's public records.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then email the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-enwikimedia.org.

Administrators: Information which has been oversighted was considered when this block was placed. Therefore the Oversight team or the Arbitration Committee must be consulted before this block can be removed. Administrators undoing oversight blocks without permission from an oversighter risk having their administrator rights removed by the Arbitration Committee (per this announcement).

-- TonyBallioni (talk) 13:45, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://udf.by/news/main_news/170652-istoriya-s-udaleniem-kontenta-novye-podrobnosti.html

[2] ttps://finance.tut.by/news606843.html

[1]

[2]