User talk:Mladen.adamovic

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:55, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest on Numbeo

Hello, Mladen.adamovic. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Numbeo, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. This includes your logged out editing with Serbian IPs 178.148.16.85 and 178.148.18.205. 49.166.139.234 (talk) 18:00, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Pauline Muley (talk) 15:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:16, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You were warned last month about editing the article directly, despite the fact that you have a clear conflict of interest, but you have continued to do so, both using this account, and while logged out. This is not acceptable. I considered just blocking you from that particular article, but since it seems to be the only article you have any interest in, I am making it a site-wide block. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:17, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

I already disclosed COI regarding Numbeo on my [User:Mladen.adamovic] several days ago, I was not aware that I should add some extra tags to related articles. I'm still learning... Wikipedia today describes my company "As of 2017, Numbeo was the largest database of user generated data about cities in the world." and my linkedin profile is https://www.linkedin.com/in/adamovic/ I don't plan on editing other articles right now, I want to be able to open disputes on a Talk pages or engage in other discussions in Talk pages

Decline reason:

If unblocked, you would not be permitted to edit about your COI subject, at least not until you had demonstrated competence over time in editing subjects where you don't have a COI. Since you said you are not interested in doing that, there is no need to lift the block. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:32, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I thought that I couldn't be blocked without prior warning from the administrator for COI edits, especially I don't see in my last Contribution nothing done in bad manner as the reference was broken? Moreover, isn't indefinete ban for editing article about my company too harsh? (I'm the owner as disclosed at my User page). Could you perhaps rewise your decision or ask additional questions or at least better explain your decision? Mladen.adamovic (talk) 17:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mladen.adamovic (talk) 19:13, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

I asked to be unblocked under the condition that I'll not edit the page Numbeo except on commenting on Talk page.

Decline reason:

This is not sufficient. You need to directly address your conflict of interest as per WP:COI and you have to tell us what else you plan to write about. Yamla (talk) 17:23, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Canvassing

I've got to admit, I've never before had someone send me an email providing a link to where they've been engaging in off-Wikipedia canvassing after being blocked for CoI editing (I'll provide evidence on request to an admin if necessary). Bold, but unwise.... AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:44, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, and BTW, just stumbled upon that for days Serbian Wikipedia claims that Glavni izvršni direktor Googlea je Milić Milićević https://sh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Google&oldid=41427972

Perhaps you should edit Wikipedia to add as third sentence "it has been criticized for its inaccuracy due to its ease of misuse and general disinformation." Mladen.adamovic (talk) 20:50, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no involvement with the Serbian Wikipedia - each project is autonomous, and it would be improper to involve myself to any significant extent in a context where I had no grasp of the relevant language. As for Wikipedia in general, our own self-referential article here on the English-language one (see Wikipedia) goes into some detail regarding comments from external sources regarding the accuracy or otherwise of the project. Personally, I'm not over-fond of navel-gazing articles concerning the project, but this one has the merit of being honest in this regard. Wikipedia has never denied that it's user-generated content can be inaccurate, subject to vandalism, and liable to bias, intentional or otherwise. In my personal opinion it is in many ways structurally flawed, meaning that such problems have no prospect of being systematically resolved. That doesn't however mean that permitting conflict-of-interest contributors to replace content they don't like (even flawed content) with ChatGPT-generated puffery would be an improvement. Our articles are supposed to be about the subject matter, not promotion for the subject, and if said subject attracts criticism regarding the inherent inaccuracy of user-generated content, we have to consider the merits of including it. That applies whether the Subject is Numbeo, or Wikipedia. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:14, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The issue about Numbeo article is on how it sounds like and the quality of the article. There is no proof that Wikipedia is more accurate than Numbeo, while article about Numbeo is utterly negative. All employees from Numbeo banned from discussing it on Wikipedia, and no one addresses Disputes on Talk page for days. Changes of extremely poor quality if you dig deep change by change. I'm also suspecting that some of the contributers might be paid by the competitors to present Numbeo badly on Wikipedia, however, I have no proof for it. Mladen.adamovic (talk) 21:26, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Numbeo article does not claim that Wikipedia is more accurate than Numbeo. I'm not even sure you could make a meaningful comparison of two such different projects. As for the rest of what you say, perhaps if you'd approached this in a little more professional manner, things might have gone better. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:42, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As it stands now, I think the page for Numbeo needs to be deleted. I think you should consider to start that process as this are probably my last words in Wikipedia. Mladen.adamovic (talk) 21:58, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Email access revoked for continued WP:CANVAS violations. Your singular fixation on Numbeo makes it very clear you should not be unblocked without a topic ban. --Yamla (talk) 10:36, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"singular fixation to Numbeo" is not correct, if you go to my edit history you can find that I've edited other articles as well in the past sporadically. I'm founder of the coampny and you are blocking access to the founder to the Talk page while at the same time doing nothing about WP:NPOV as discussed at the Talk:Numbeo. It looks like ghosttown, if I engage into real canvassing, it would not be rant like this https://www.linkedin.com/posts/adamovic_cost-of-living-activity-7062146944734830592-dRhR?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop but the rant will be distributed to ~1.2M subscribers of Numbeo mailing list Mladen.adamovic (talk) 10:58, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While I disagree with your approach here on Wikipedia and while I'm very sure you have a low opinion of me and others involved in your block or unblock reviews, I do want to say I think Numbeo is a fascinating and valuable project. I'm sure you are rightfully proud of having founded it and I love that projects like that exist. I think the data would be immensely interesting to statisticians and economists and I'm very glad the site is around. None of this is an attempt to change your opinion of me (or others), I just want to honestly and sincerely say thank you for creating that project. --Yamla (talk) 11:30, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aahahahaha, I don't have a low opinion of you, you were more looking into Wikipedia rules about myself, not about the content. But still, you can fix things between Numbeo and Wikipedia. First thing would probably be to TEMPORARILY remove **ALL** BANs against me on Wikipedia, or at least ban to the Talk page, but I think all bans should be reverted and investigate other users who contributed to Numbeo. If you start to do witch hunt for enforcing every single rule on Wikipedia, it won't work honestly. Yes, I admit I did bend rules, cut corners, but it was just because I was pissed by WP:NPOV.

Or find someone to write a good article about Numbeo in 24hours. That's how long it took us to fix that Lund hacker. Mladen.adamovic (talk) 11:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to mention, that I've learned about some Wikipedia rules in the past few days. Most users here I guess don't know all rules anyways. Mladen.adamovic (talk) 12:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I need one information. Do you perhaps know if there is someone currently working on improving article about Numbeo ? Mladen.adamovic (talk) 07:02, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is short of volunteers. Many, like me, are just not interested in reviewing COI-edit requests. And please stop canvassing, as I see with 伟思礼. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 16:31, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest you to assume good faith WP:FAITH. BTW, I'm located in Serbia and I guess he is located in China, Singapore or Taiwan, by user name in Chinese. I don't think I know that user and if you imply that I know everyone who come to Talk:Numbeo who agrees with me, how does it sounds? And what is this, you all strive to engage with conversations with a banned user? If Wikipedia do not have editors to take care about Numbeo article, you can delete it, as that is completely fine with me. But if you don't know better website for cost of living comparison, and yet you have so negative article about Numbeo, that certainly states something about you. That certainly sounds more fair than implying that whoever comes to Talk:Numbeo or contribute something about Numbeo acts as my agent. That sounds like a hostile enviroment, and if you make it hostile, that maybe could backfire. I'n not here to make personal issues with anyone. I didn't know that Canvassing is against wikipedia policies at all until a few days back. Mladen.adamovic (talk) 17:11, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even more, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/%E4%BC%9F%E6%80%9D%E7%A4%BC&target=%E4%BC%9F%E6%80%9D%E7%A4%BC if you look into his contributors, he is obviously not a sleeper. Mladen.adamovic (talk) 17:15, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, In good faith, as I mentioned that I'm ready for compromise, I have just sent an email to Wikipedia legal department, case 60286, in which I have revoked Cease and Desist Letter, so that admins have policy grounds to reconsider my unban request. Details here: https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=12960 Mladen.adamovic (talk) 08:49, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, Wikipedia has still another policy, WP:NLT - "No Legal Threats". I read at an off-Wikipedia site that you're thinking of involving a lawyer. If someone makes a legal threat, our policy is to block them. This policy's purpose is less about silencing critics and discouraging them from exercising their legal rights than simplifying the legal process. This policy protects the Wikimedia Foundation from having a bunch of amateur editors complicating a potential lawsuit by saying all sorts of unhelpful things. As you have seen by now, our community includes a wide range of personalities; some are problematic. If you're taking the legal route, Wikimedia wants their lawyers talking to you and your lawyers -- professionals talking to professionals.

This would cut off all interaction between you and editors who might work on your article, so there are pros and cons to either approach.

I'm no longer an administrator, just a bystander trying to be helpful.--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 20:59, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

aaaahhh, while I appreciate your helpfulness, the Cease and Desist letter has been already been sent out, so I don't see a way of rewoking it if another party is not read to solve the problems outside of the court Mladen.adamovic (talk) 21:46, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I have been pursued to revoke my Cease and Desist Letter and did so. Mladen.adamovic (talk) 08:49, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jun 2023

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

The last change on Numbeo page was https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Numbeo&diff=1154081755&oldid=1154065253 . I thought that although I have COI, it will be tolerated as the description was based on the broken link that was actually not sourced properly (the link used was http://www.icaew.com/en/library/subject-gateways/human-resources/cost-of-living-comparisons you can look into that content in archive.org https://web.archive.org/web/20171117030510/http://www.icaew.com/en/library/subject-gateways/human-resources/cost-of-living-comparisons it contains different description. The description on Wikipedia had words "claims itself to be". I have searched that term, and it seems it has been mostly used for entities when they claim something another party thinks is not correct. There are many other places where a more neutral description could be found, i.e. https://www.euronews.com/travel/2022/09/24/food-healthcare-and-restaurants-compare-cost-of-living-around-the-world-with-this-tool https://news.google.com/search?q=%22numbeo%20is%22 . Also, when I have created that change, I intentionally wanted to create a NPOV trap for other editors, I was not aware at that time that it was not allowed according to Wikipedia policies. I understand now that it was much better way only to dispute the description on the talk page. For other changes on Numbeo page, I understand now that to suggest a page for deletion, a person with COI probably should only create a Talk entry about it, and at least leave it for a week for discussion, I guess marking the page as Disuputed could be tolerated if the person with COI creates multiple disputes at the page and I have created several disputes at Talk:Numbeo. It seems that there are now many experienced editors and admins who are watching this page and I understand if you would unblock me, if I think that some change might be legitimate, I can request change using request edit template. I need to emphasize that I have never removed any criticism about Numbeo from the page in the past 9 years and have never added claims that could not be verified nor especially promotional, in its nature. Due to the nature of the project, I'm the person who has the most in-depth knowledge about it, and I want to be able to dispute the content on the company Talk page. Also, unblock would allow me to fix inaccuracies in the future if I spot them in other pages, and in the past, I have for example updated information about Taxation in Serbia. In unblocked, I'd try to make sure I follow all policies and not be blocked or banned again. If there is something else, you want me to address, please just ask, and I'll answer in all the details. I'm tagging admin who blocked me User:Girth_Summit so hopefully he can read this as well.

Decline reason:

I'm declining on the basis that your continued presence at Talk:Numbeo is likely to be a net-negative to Wikipedia _signed,Rosguill ^talk 21:41, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

The Numbeo page description was based on the broken link that was actually not sourced properly (the link used was http://www.icaew.com/en/library/subject-gateways/human-resources/cost-of-living-comparisons you can look into that content in archive.org https://web.archive.org/web/20171117030510/http://www.icaew.com/en/library/subject-gateways/human-resources/cost-of-living-comparisons. The description on Wikipedia had words "claims itself to be". I have searched that term, and it has been mostly used for subjects when they claim something another party thinks is incorrect. There are many other places where a more neutral description could be found, i.e. https://www.euronews.com/travel/2022/09/24/food-healthcare-and-restaurants-compare-cost-of-living-around-the-world-with-this-tool https://news.google.com/search?q=%22numbeo%20is%22 . Also, I intentionally wanted to create a NPOV trap for other editors, I was not aware at that time that it was not allowed according to Wikipedia policies. I understand now that it is the best way for a person with COI to propose a change on the Talk page and shall not edit the page directly. I need to emphasize that I have never removed any criticism about Numbeo from the page in the past 9 years and have never added claims that could not be verified nor especially promotional, in its nature. Unblock would allow me to spend some time in Neutral Point of View Noticeboard, fix inaccuracies in the future if I spot them on other pages, and propose changes or dispute content in the Talk:Numbeo article. In the past, I have for example updated information about other topics as well. In unblocked, I'd try to make sure I follow all policies and not be blocked or banned again. Can I get the second and the last chance please, WP:ROPE ? This is my last and final request, and I'm willing to answer any additional questions you have if any (if I can reply to them on my user page I couldn't reply to some

Decline reason:

None of Wikipedia's volunteer admins have been able to disagree with the previous rejection of your unblock requests. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 05:45, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.