User talk:DCKH

Welcome!
Hello, DCKH, and welcome to Wikipedia!&#32;Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article.&#32;Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Exemplo347 (talk) 19:48, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

<!--

APA Group (Australia)
Hello, I'm Kerry Raymond. I noticed that you recently removed content from APA Group (Australia) without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.<!- Template:uw-delete1 -> Kerry (talk) 10:19, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * May you please tell me without using the boilerplate template uw-delete1, why you've forgotten the write some content?--DCKH (talk) 14:29, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Read WP:Notability and Stub. The article is a stub. It exists because it was redlinked in a number of other articles so it was needed - you can check this with What links here (left hand tool bar). It is not a topic in which I have particular expertise or interest so I only wrote a stub. The minimum requirements for a stub are the independent citations to meet notability. If you don't think the article should exist at all due to lack of notability, you may pursue one of the deletion processes; you do not independently decide these things; you need to obtain consensus. If you feel the article is too short, then you should enlarge it (as per WP:Stub). The boilerplate comes from the Twinkle tool that experienced editors use to manage changes too often hundreds of articles each day. Your redirection means that several other articles now have a link to an article about a stock market index instead of a gas company. How does that help the reader of SEAGas pipeline etc understand anything about its ownership of the asset being described? I note you are a very new user here, so can I suggest that you get some practice in writing article content and creating articles before you think about deleting them? Kerry (talk) 15:10, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * You don't get the point. I'm asking you personally: Why have you written just a stub? Why so lazy? The John Doe reader expects more from a "blue link" than the pure confirmation of existence.
 * I don't want to delete anything, I want you to think about your work as Wikipedian.
 * BTW: I've enough practice (more than 1000 articles in another language, not a single stub!).--DCKH (talk) 17:21, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

personal attacks
No personal attacks Kerry (talk) 22:41, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * This wasn't a personal attack. The madam seems to evade a discussion with me.--DCKH (talk) 10:30, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

-->

Wrong zero line?
I note that you deleted a graph in United States energy independence for having a "wrong zero line." Could you explain what was wrong with it? Thanks. Plazak (talk) 21:49, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes: The vertical (y) axis of the chart should start at "0" and not below, like it is currently at File:US Net Gas Imports.svg.--DCKH (talk) 22:40, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The below zero part of the graph shows the current situation of net exports. It is neither inaccurate nor illogical. Again, in what sense is it "wrong"? And how would you construct the graph? Regards. Plazak (talk) 12:53, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've just noticed that the "Total Net Imports" can be both negative and positive so my complaint is pointless. Would you allow me to rename "Total Net Imports" into a more accurate "Trade balance"? If exports > imports the calculation "imports - exports" no longer yields net imports. Regards, --DCKH (talk) 23:32, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Renaming the graph "Trade Balance" is an excellent suggestion to avoid confusion. Thanks. Plazak (talk) 13:43, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Soviet integrated circuit designation
The designation uses the Cyrillic alphabet which sometimes leads to confusion where a Cyrillic letter has the same appearance as a Latin letter but is romanized as a different letter. Furthermore, for some Cyrillic letters the Romanization is ambiguous. - Why would you consider this statement unencyclopaedic? The designation certainly does use the cyrillic alphabet. There are numerous examples on the web and even here in the English Wikipedia where people mistake a cyrillic glyph for the identical-looking latin glyph (KP580BM80A instead of KR580VM80A). In my mind this justifies a clarification. Cheers, Drahtlos (talk) 13:53, 17 April 2019 (UTC)