User talk:Peter.hantz

Welcome!
Hello, Peter.hantz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you created or edited was Draft:Peter Hantz, which appears to be an article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is a common mistake made by new Wikipedians—as this is an encyclopedia, we wouldn't expect to have an article about every contributor. Your user page, however, is a great place to write about yourself, making sure to stay within user page guidelines. Just click your user name at the top of the screen when you are logged in, and edit it normally.

The page you created about yourself may well be deleted from the encyclopedia. If it is deleted and you wish to retrieve its contents, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page. If your contributions to an existing article about yourself are undone and you wish to add to it, please propose the changes on its talk page.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful: 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, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!  Grey joy talk 11:31, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * 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

August 2019
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at User talk:Dawnseeker2000, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment, or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button OOUI JS signature icon LTR.png located above the edit window.

Thank you. Nigos (t@lk • Contribs) 09:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

COI
Thanks for your message, please remember to sign postings in future. You have an obvious conflict of interest, please don't write about yourself.


 * When you write about a person, you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that they meet the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the person or an associated organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the person claims or interviewing them. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls. Most of your text was unsourced, and your only references were your own publications, not independent third-party sources. Note that your own original research is never going to be acceptable as a ref or evidence of notability. It's also not at all clear that you meet the notability criteria I linked above.
 * you must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews. Your self-written text seems to have no purpose other than to promote yourself and your research, Also best known for for his work... his inventions... his social responsibility is clearly just your opinion of yourself, which we really aren't interested in.
 * there shouldn't normally be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections. You had several, all, of course, to your own organisations or papers.
 * you must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient. I'm not suggesting your text is a copyright violation, but since it's unsourced, we don't know.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  11:19, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

August 2019
You are suspected of sock puppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, then, if you wish to do so, respond to the evidence at Sockpuppet investigations/Peter.hantz. Thank you. Nigos (t@lk • Contribs) 12:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment, or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button OOUI JS signature icon LTR.png located above the edit window.

Thank you. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  12:57, 6 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Please note that Hungarian Wikipedia is independent of en-wiki and has different and generally less strict rules. You won't lose time recreating refs because your draft had no independent third-party sources as required here, so nothing to restore. You can, of course recreate the article, but if it isn't an improvement it will be deleted as promotional and/or not meeting the notability criteria. You should also bear in mind that of you persist in promoting yourself, you can be blocked as WP:Not here, WP:Advertising or WP:Sock puppetry. Pinging Nigos for info Jimfbleak - talk to me?  13:08, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Sir, I repeatedly asked for the source code. If you do not provide me the source code, I will write it again. Let me to deal with the Hungarian Wikipedia.

Your recent editing history at Precession shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle 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.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  13:23, 6 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Sir, I was in an edit war in 2016, for the kurtosh kalach. Finally it turned out that I had right and all my contributions were restored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter.hantz (talk • contribs)


 * Your response demonstrates that you do not understand the English Wikipedia's three-revert rule. You may not revert an article more than three times in 24 hours, regardless of whether your edit is "right" or not. (There are limited exceptions to the rule for blatant vandalism.) You also may not make an end run around this rule by reverting using a different account, as you apparently did here. —C.Fred (talk) 13:32, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * As an aside, I do not see any edit warring in 2016 in Kürtőskalács. —C.Fred (talk) 13:37, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation
MrOllie (talk) 10:49, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation
MrOllie (talk) 11:10, 18 September 2019 (UTC)