User talk:VasekCh

Please see this, and the comments at your article
...under he "View history", which shows edit summaries for the last two edits that I performed to your biography here at Wikipedia. I recommend the following course of action:
 * 1) Go to the front page of your article. In the new boxed "tag" that appears at the head of your article, click on the word "autobiography". It will take you to a policy/guideline that you need to read, WP:AUTOBIO.
 * 2) Go to WP:VERIFY (click on this link) and skim/read. Pay closest attention to content that discuss third-party, and independent sourcing requirements.
 * 3) After reading these, go again to the "View history", and find the links that lets you revert (a) the "AnomieBOT" dating edit, and (b) my last edit, adding the autobiography "tag". Revert these in order listed here. (The first added a date to my tag, the second, earlier edit was added for your benefit, so you understand the issue, and access the guidelines, and I will not contest its removal.)
 * 4) Then, again in the "View history", you may, with my approval, revert my removal of your 6,263 bytes of extensive edits. But, do this only if, you immediately go in, and:
 * a. Remove any of your earlier edits that were unsourced and  any edits that were based on self-published sources (e.g., your self-written biosketches at your Condordia, meeting, author, or other such webpages), i.e., if you yourself remove edits that violate WP:VERIFY). Be sure to briefly note in your edit summaries waht you have done, and why;
 * b. If you do this editing, being willing to abide, in future, with the fact that others, and not you, are intended to edit your article.

Please also note: Quite a few faculty members edit here, and edit articles other than the ones about themselves. We very much hope this will happen, from you, but in accordance with WP:VERIFY. The problem with being an expert in your field is you have ample "off top of head" knowledge. This is not what we want, because no special class exists for experts, and were we to allow you and other faculty to place unsourced material we cannot stop anyone from doing so. (Imagine your worst undergraduate student editing the article on graph theory or on combinatorics.) Having a source allows editors to compare material placed, to the source, and remove it, if it is not verifiable.

Finally, you will find many, many articles that violate the rules and principles to which we have called your attention. This does not mean we should not enforce them when they come to our attention. Working backward to fix the many problems—plagiarism being a major one, WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH being another—will take years and years, if it ever happens at all.

Cheers, a former colleague. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 18:52, 22 March 2017 (UTC)