User talk:Ulichar

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Ulichar, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! Kolbasz (talk) 21:47, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Aleksandar Mladenović[edit]

The article Aleksandar Mladenović has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement (in particular, WP:PROF). If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back. Thank you,

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:44, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Piotrus, I have now included six points of reference which pretty much cover what is to be found in the article. Are we fine now? Ulichar (talk) 18:13, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. After a second review, I think that "member of the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences" is enough for notability. I have added categories. If he has an article on Serbian Wikipedia, please add the appopriate WP:INTERWIKI link. Cheers, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 22:29, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Petar Novaković Čardaklija[edit]

You created the article for Petar Novaković Čardaklija with the name Novaković and Čardaklija, leaving me unsure which name to use in the listas as the surname.--DThomsen8 (talk) 14:08, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Novaković was his surname (most probably after his father, Novak) but Čardaklija was the name/nickname under which he is most widely known. I guess you should use "Čardaklija". Ulichar (talk) 14:13, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I added listas=Novaković Čardaklija, Petar for now. --DThomsen8 (talk) 14:41, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine to me. Ulichar (talk) 15:24, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015[edit]

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bbb23 (talk) 03:18, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Ulichar (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have absolutely no idea why you blocked my account. The only thing that comes to my mind is that years ago (2008/9, I believe) I contributed to Wikipedia with a different account. I could not log onto it again (forgot all the passwords, cannot access the old emails) so I thought it was easier to start another one. Anyway, I read the "Inappropriate uses of alternative accounts" and I can't see what seems to be the problem. I did not join ANY discussions on the articles I previously created and have worked on totally new ones now. If that is not a "clean start under a new name" then tell me what should I do. Or at least explain why you are blocking the account and then, when I learn what I'm accused of, I could reply properly. Ulichar (talk) 14:27, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Per my comments below. Bbb23 (talk) 06:18, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ulichar. It doesn't seem to be anything back in 2008 - it's now. Peridon (talk) 14:56, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, let's review these accusations briefly: (1) I was not inflating population numbers. (2) As for adding listings of "Notable People" sections, once it was pointed out to me that it cannot be done without a proper source (wish you would apply this policy in all the cases) I decided to write all of these articles to back my claims and have thus contributed to Wikipedia by 15 articles. All of them have reference sections. If anyone thinks these people are not notable enough, we can discuss that. (3) After reverting back the list before it was pointed out to me why was it erased I did not revert anything else . (4) I answered to all the messages left on my talk page. In conclusion, it seems obvious that I have corrected my ways when I my wrongs were pointed out, I've discussed when I was asked and have not done anything against any rules here.

And the other accounts? How about them? Peridon (talk) 16:55, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If I got it right from what was written so far in the discussion investigation one person already answered, the other one can barely speak English. There must be another way of distinguishing people, because this is a very unfair position for me. Did the other two write 15 articles as me? Did they support my articles in any way? My goal in the last two weeks was to write biographies of notable Serbs from Macedonia, I don't see why I should suffer because two more people (of whom one cannot write in English) did something on the same page as I did? Ulichar (talk) 19:06, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What was the name of the account you created a long time ago and then abandoned?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:10, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The name was User:Dultz (or rather, it still is)

Just out of curiosity, your last edit with that account was at the end of 2007. This account was created in 2010. Why the long break? (Please remember to sign your posts. Thanks.) --Bbb23 (talk) 15:18, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, keep forgetting to sign it. Why the long break? Why not? : ) I got a bit tired and was on a master program abroad. Then started working. I don't really have too much time on my hands but I want to contribute to Wikipedia where I notice a blind spot that I seem to know about. Ulichar (talk) 11:29, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to seek some input from others on your unblock request. It might take a little time, so please be patient. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:45, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ulichar, another SPI clerk/administrator looked at the evidence, behavioral and technical, against you, as well as what you've said here. They lean in favor of unblocking you, which, as it happens, was the way I was leaning before I sought their input. That said, I want you to understand that if in the future there is ever an instance where you are shown to be socking, either with a named account or with an IP, you risk being indefinitely blocked, and the possibility of your being unblocked would be next to nil, at least for quite some time after the block. In other words, you must strictly comply with the stock puppetry policy. As an aside, although not strictly relevant to the sock puppetry issue, in looking at your contribution history, particularly your more recent history, I found that you were often uncivil and even attacking with respect to other users. By contrast, in this discussion, I've found you to be polite and measured in your comments. Obviously, you can be respectful when you wish to be. Please try to carry that over when discussing content with other editors.--Bbb23 (talk) 06:13, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reconsidering this damaging decision. At times I feel like you're looking at (and talking with) some other user... There will be no socking as there was none up till now, right? Secondly, where have I been uncivil and attacking other users? Since my return, in last month or so, I did not discuss anything. If you give me an example we might sort this misunderstanding. I am respectful to anyone who respects me, I have no problems with that. Anyway, let us hope there won't be any more breaks in our corroboration. And thanks for being able to listen and observe. I mean it. Ulichar (talk) 19:12, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Saint Nicetas, Banjane, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page St Theodore. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:47, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Ilija Šumenković

added a link pointing to Borovec

List of people from Struga

added a link pointing to Borovec

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 21 April 2015 (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) 14:24, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Ulichar. 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]