Eep07

Possible copyright infringement

Hi Eep07,

it appears you are the main or sole contributor to Victor Krylov, and have uploaded all(?) of this article’s illustrations to Wikimedia Commons. Are you Victor Krylov yourself, or the copyright owner of these files? It is important that you make this clear, because otherwise all of your uploads are likely to be marked as copyright violations. Thanks in advance. Ariadacapo (talk) 14:46, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

No copyright infringement whatsoever

Hi Ariadacapo,

I am a friend of Victor Krylov, and I am the copyright owner of all uploaded images. There is no copyright violations whatsoever. Also, I do not see any bias in the article, and there is no conflict of interest. In my opinion, the article is neutral and well balanced. If you find that any particular sentences deviate from neutrality, it would be nice if you could let me know. I would do my best to improve them. In any case, I welcome your suggestion for the users to make their contributions to improve the quality of the article. Kind regards, Eep07 (talk) 22:57, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Eep07, several images here are reproduced from published research papers. Such was the case for Image:Wedge_elastic_waves.jpg which comes from https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace-jspui/bitstream/2134/6157/1/Krylov_JASA_1998%5B1%5D.pdf. You indicated that it was your "own work" but the paper only lists Krylov as an author (and a license which is incompatible with use in Wikipedia). The file was just deleted.

We need to sort out the situation for all of the other files used in this article or they will also be deleted. One way to solve this problem is to get authorization from Krylov himself to publish those files under a compatible license. But you and him need to understand that this explicitly allows re-modification and re-use elsewhere by anyone, and is an irrevocable decision. Also, some research paper publishers request copyright transfer to them which prevents such a re-licensing -- this needs to be checked out.

Please go through every file you uploaded again carefully, indicate the real source and the original author. We (at Wikimedia Commons) can help with the re-licensing and corrections, but without your input this will certainly end up in a deletion. Thanks, Ariadacapo (talk) 06:55, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ariadacapo,

To make things easier, I have removed all the images associated with published research papers. Kind regards, Eep07 (talk) 09:57, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

OK thanks, I have filed deletion requests for these files at Wikimedia Commons. Ariadacapo (talk) 11:03, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Physical acoustics, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Propagation, Acoustic and Ultrasonic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 08:53, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Victor Krylov, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Bbb23 (talk) 00:06, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

• Additional warnings. You have an aknowledged conflict of interest. It's clear that you have no concept of Wikipedia policies and guidelines and you can't edit the article neutrally. If you want to change the article, you should be proposing your changes on the article talk page and only making changes for which there is a consensus. You are adding promotional material. You are adding massive amounts of unsourced material, or material that is sourced to the subject of the article. None of this is acceptable, and if you continue, you risk being blocked. Also, stop with the calling of other editors vandals. It's not true, and it will only hasten your being sanctioned.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:10, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at Victor Krylov shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 00:18, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bbb23, What promotional material are you talking about? This article is about a scientist, not about a salesman. All evidence is there: the list of published books and selected papers. It is stupid first to remove them and then say that the material is unsourced. (Eep07 (talk) 00:45, 14 July 2014 (UTC))

You can just as easily promote a scientist as a salesperson. You promote what they do. Assuming all the material you're adding is sourced to Krylov's works, that's what we call WP:BLPSPS. There are no other sources besides Krylov. Minor things that are not self-serving can be sourced to Krylov, but the incredible amount of material you added to the Work section is way out of bounds. Also, there's no reason to have a huge list of his works on the page. There are ways to link to all of his works that would serve the same purpose. Otherwise, it is much better to cite works for which other people have commented as to their value, i.e., secondary sources. You also can't remove maintenance templates just because you don't like them. At the rate you're going, you're going to lose the ability to do anything on Wikipedia, including have some influence on what goes on in your "friend"'s article.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:59, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Eep07. Wikipedia is based on the principle of "verification" where all the information on the page needs to be supported by a credible, independent source, such as a book, press article or academic source, that verifies the information on the page is accurate. This is considered especially important on articles about living people, where our policy is to remove any information, positive or negative, that is not supported by a strong source that can verify its accuracy. The majority of the work that goes into writing a page is actually in researching the source material. This is necessary for you to contribute productively. Let me know if there is any way I can help. CorporateM (Talk) 01:17, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you CorporateM and Bbb23. Eep07, besides the COI there are good reasons to think that you are not here to contribute to the project, but that your only real interest is to promote the work and biography of Victor Krylov. Such accounts are typically blocked; I hope that won't be necessary here. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 03:46, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi CorporateM,

In the current version of the article about Victor Krylov that has appeared as a result of the massive unilateral editing (decimation) by Ariadacapo, the editor (Ariadacapo) had managed to introduce two major science-related errors into what remained of the article. If left uncorrected, these errors would mislead the reader. As you know, I tried to revert the article to eliminate this issue along with the others all together, but met an unexpected resistance from other editors, including yourself. Therefore, I am bringing these errors to this forum for discussion. Both of these errors are in the section 'Work'.

1) In the 2nd paragraph, it is written: "...conducting research on ground vibrations generated by railway trains and by road vehicles travelling at speeds exceeding the velocity of Rayleigh surface waves in the supporting ground". While this is correct for trains, there were still no observations (and investigations) of road vehicles travelling at speeds exceeding the velocity of Rayleigh surface waves in the supporting ground. This is a phantasy of Ariadacapo that should be corrected.

2) In the 3rd paragraph, it is written: "...working on the theory of acoustic black holes for flexural waves" and the web link is provided for 'acoustic black holes' alone to a site named 'Sonic black hole'. This is a wrong and misleading link to a different type of black holes formed by liquids flowing at speeds higher than speed of sound. Scientists try to use such black holes to prove the existence of Hawking radiation, which is absolutely different from black holes for flexural waves introduced by Krylov. The latter were briefly described in the previous version of the article and supported by links to the original refereed journal papers, before all these were eliminated by Ariadacapo. The easiest way to correct this error would be simply to remove the link to 'Sonic black hole'.

Please consider the above errors and correct them if you agree. Thank you,(Eep07 (talk) 21:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC))

Putting aside the unwarranted attack on Ariadacapo and putting aside the fact that you still don't see that material generally must not be included unless supported by secondary sources, not by Krylov, in both #1 and #2, please cite the specific journal or work by Krylov, including page number(s), that support the corrections.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:54, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bbb23,

I have applied a few editorial cuts directly to the 'Work' section to remove the above-mentioned errors and the remaining 'unsourced' material. I believe this article no longer has any issues, so that you can remove your maintenance template.

Regarding Ariadacapo, I have nothing personal against him. He simply did a bad job on this article. I hope he does better with other articles he edits for Wikipedia (this is not a suggestion for you as administrator to monitor all his articles). (Eep07 (talk) 12:53, 15 July 2014 (UTC))

You didn't do what I asked, but I don't have a major problem with your last edit. If an article is mostly unsourced, removing material is generally not problematic. Both tags still apply. You're still editing the article, and more and better sourcing is needed for the article. I'm not a bit worried about Ariadacapo or the articles they've worked on, and I doubt they did a "bad job" on the Krylov article.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:08, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nonlinear acoustics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elasticity. 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) 09:01, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Acousto-electric effect, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Intensity. 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) 09:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rayleigh wave, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Filters. 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) 08:58, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 16:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Eep07. 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)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Eep07. 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)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Eep07. 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)