User talk:UKR

Welcome!

Hello, UKR, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Darwinek (talk) 18:29, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Guyana[edit]

Accordying to Statcounter, in Guyana Internet Explorer has always been the number one browser, so far. So the most used web browser by countries map it´s not correct. Guyana must be blue instead of orange. Guyana is next to Venezuela. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.239.235.88 (talk) 13:45, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eritrea[edit]

Since several months ago, in Eritrea IE is the leader, in the map appears incorrectly to be Firefox. It needs correction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.234.131.152 (talk) 05:22, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK UKR (talk) 22:45, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tanzania[edit]

In February 2012, Firefox is leader in Tanzania — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.239.225.131 (talk) 01:27, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Are you checked up all of countries? UKR (talk) 11:39, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a rule?[edit]

Is it a rule to update the map at the end of each month? why don't you just automatically change the browser share-country map immidiately when a change occurs?--88.240.39.174 (talk) 19:35, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but 2 last months I had changed map at the begin of each month. Today your claims is groundless. UKR (talk) 10:57, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Maybe you do have a problem with english understanding, read my comments carefully again. I asked you whether it is a wikipedia rule to change the map at the end of each month and I asked you the purpose of delaying the updates until the start of each month. 2 questions. no claims. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.240.39.174 (talk) 16:12, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sorry, I really have problem with english. I don't know any rules about it but it seems to be logical. UKR (talk) 08:45, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

COI[edit]

Hi, thanks for your message, please remember to sign next time. The fact that other articles have not been deleted isn't relevant, either they met the criteria or should be deleted as well. See What about article x?. Also note that many articles would have been accepted before the notability guidelines were made stricter. Thanks for the link to the Tajikistan article, now also deleted

If you have a conflict of interest, you must declare it. In particular, if you work directly or indirectly for an organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. If you are paid directly or indirectly by the organisation you are writing about, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:UKR. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=UKR|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message. Also read the following regarding writing an article

you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the 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 organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls. The article was almost entirely unsourced, and the few refs were not to independent third-party sources as we require
The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:

significant coverage in
independent,
multiple,
reliable,
secondary sources.

Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability. Without proper refs it can't be notable, and the content is short on what should be basic data such as the number of employees, funding and expenditure. Instead we get lists of named officials, which is discouraged, and a collection of spamlinks to its own pages

you must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews. The text is largely unsourced promo, such as Its members are the biggest investors and largest multinationals... It serves members in driving actionable dialogue... continuously creating opportunities.. promoting Ukraine internationally as an attractive investment destination, and that's just from the intro!
there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections. That's particularly the case when, as here, they are nearly all spamlinks to its own pages. One link to the main site in the External links section is OK, that's it.
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 didn't check for copyright, so this is just guidance.

We sometimes restore text, but by the time I've removed the promo and irrelevant or spammy lists, there would be little left. I could give you the infobox code if you want to try again. However, 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. You must also reply to the COI request above Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:20, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]