User talk:Vacilandois

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 17:07, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Covergent evolution[edit]

Thanks for starting this page. We already have an article on Convergent evolution, so I've redirected Covergent evolution to the existing article.-gadfium 08:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings - please note that "covergent evolution" is a distinct concept and topic. Can you please revert your redirect? --Tjfulopp 08:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked at your two references. The first doesn't use the word "covergent" at all, but is talking about convergent evolution. The second seems to me to be using "covergent" in the same way as "convergent" - evolution of similar traits independently by different organisms, although in the particular example used, the orb web seems to have a single ancestral form.-gadfium 08:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Thai sun outage.jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Thai sun outage.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 17:44, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pavol hudak.jpg[edit]

Hi. Who is Peter Laučík, and when and where did he release this photo into the public domain? Picaroon (t) 01:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of IGO Search[edit]

A tag has been placed on IGO Search, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant 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 as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Mayalld (talk) 13:50, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

August 2008[edit]

Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to IGO Search, as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you. Mayalld (talk) 15:00, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'll read up some more what constitutes 'minor edit' (normally it's quite subjective, isn't it). (I'll mark this edit as major, hopefully it is OK, even if for me it is very minor.) --Tomas J. Fulopp (talk) 15:27, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:Mayalld. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Your message on my talk page was distinctly lacking civility. The article was properly nominated, and had several issues, none of which were addressed. If you wish to dispute the deletion, then speak to the deleting admin, or take it to WP:DRV. Mayalld (talk) 20:54, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No need to welcome me, sir, I've been registered at Wikipedia 5 years before you.
I have commented on your contribution, namely not explained, evasive, confused deletion of my article, not about your self. I sincerely apologize if the latter was understood in any way.
You say my article had issues - but you know that I immediately (minutes after you), extensively and more than once asked you to provide reasons, which you kept evading, and finally you let the article be deleted.
Just out of interest - why have you deleted my comments from your page? I know you have the right to do that, but why did you delete it if you feel you had done the correct action a few hours ago? I would not think it contained any uncivil language. If you think it did, I would appreciate any explanations, so that I learn.
I must repeat the gist of my complaint and question to you, now on my talk page, which you hopefully won't rush to delete, so that others can objectively judge:

You marked it for speedy deletion, and I was able to evidence you had circumvented the normal Wikipedia manners of dealing with possibly suspect content. I had cited my objections with due links to Wikipedia help pages, in an objective and rational tone. However, your answers have been a) cursory, b) not answering my questions, c) not reflecting on the reasons I have provided, and d) you kept changing reasons for your act and still refused to re-consider. Since you seem to be very knowledgeable and immensely sure about Wikipedia rules, could I hereby ask you to kindly tell me what can a common user like myself to legally (that is within Wikipedia's realm) protest against what have you done to my work today. I mean, what is the next higher instance for complaints of this kind. As a honest Wikipedian, I am sure you will gladly help me. I need to hear from other people who supported your opinion, and from the person who did the ultimate deletion decision. I really hope to come to the root of this issue because acts of suspected self-righteous policing should definitely be properly investigated in the interest of keeping the Wikipedia project sound and alive for the future. (My full posting is in the revisions here.)

I appreciate your link to WP:DRV; I am acting on that.

--Tomas J. Fulopp (talk) 21:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review[edit]

For a deletion review request to be taken seriously, your nomination must explain why you think the deletion is in error. Can you provide reliable sources as to the notability of the subject of the article? Was there any discussion between you and the deleting admin as far as the notability of the subject, or did you start off with attacking him, which caused him to remove your comments from his page? Did you notify the deleter of the WP:DRV thread, as is required? Corvus cornix_talk 21:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reacted on the 'speedy deletion' nomination mere minutes after it was posted today. I asked the editor, very politely, why this was done. Initially he cited 'blatant advertising', which I questioned, and he changed it to lack of 'notability', which I countered providing objective information about the non-commercial non-governmental nature and superb respectability of the publisher of the service described (mandate of the United Nations, 101 year history as an international research institute, etc.) I also said, citing help sources, that if notability was in question, speedy deletion is the last resort of an editor, and I asked him to reconsider. Afterwards he asked for sources, which I was ready to answer, were the article not already deleted in the meantime. It would have been enough if he changed it to possible deletion, giving me and other people more time, don't you think? --Tomas J. Fulopp (talk) 22:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I am not able to find out how to establish who was and how to contact the admin deleter. Can you help a bit more, please? --Tomas J. Fulopp (talk) 22:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As to admin abuse, DRV is not the place to discuss that. WP:ANI is the proper place for that, but you'll need to prove that the deletion was inappropriate. There are far too many people whining about admin abuse to get taken seriously unless you come armed with evidence, not opinion and personal attacks. Note: I am not an admin. Corvus cornix_talk 21:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am ready to go into that, if only the deleted article could be re-enabled for some period, to allow a proper and full discussion and a consensus to take place. Thanks for any further consideration, based on my points above, you can give this issue. --Tomas J. Fulopp (talk) 22:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Civility[edit]

Until such time as your messages develop a sense of genuine civility, you will get no answers from me. Mayalld (talk) 22:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not accuse me without proof, sir, and let others see what I wrote, to show it was not uncivil, instead of simply deleting it. Thank you! --Tomas J. Fulopp (talk) 22:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The revisions with the deleted text remain available to anybody who cares to look at them. I do not care to look at it any longer. Mayalld (talk) 06:28, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Vacilando[edit]

I have nominated Vacilando, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vacilando (2nd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. BJ^Talk 09:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC) BJ^Talk 09:50, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Scalr[edit]

A tag has been placed on Scalr, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Clubmarx (talk) 18:36, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note[edit]

What you posted at Talk:Human Values should also be posted at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Human_values. -- IRP ☎ 16:31, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Scalr[edit]

A tag has been placed on Scalr, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. [roux » x] 06:28, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference[edit]

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer have them marked as minor by default.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you are familiar with the contents of WP:MINOR, and believe that it is still beneficial to the encyclopedia to have all your edits marked as such by default, then this discussion will give you the details you need to continue with this functionality indefinitely. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:28, 14 March 2011 (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) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Pavol hudak.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Pavol hudak.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 10:09, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kelly, I got that picture from Pavol Hudák himself many years ago when I created a page about him on my website, see http://www.vacilando.org/article/pavol-hudak-jeho-basne I put the name of the person who took the photo on that site and subsequently also when I worked on the Wikipedia article. Tomáš J. Fülöpp 22:16, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Vacilandois. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Vacilandois. 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]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Vacilandois. 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, Vacilandois. 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]

Speedy deletion nomination of GatsbyJS[edit]

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 GatsbyJS requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.gatsbyjs.org. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lopifalko (talk) 18:27, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]