Jump to content

User talk:Ldm1954

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ising critical exponents

[edit]

@Ldm1954

Hello, given the repeated removal of Ning Su's formula. I am not sure you realize how strange this is. You say the article should be understandable to high school students. High school students in which country? In the US or in the UK or in any other English-speaking country? In which high school? I am sure there are are many high school students who know what the Gamma function is (I knew this when I was in high school), and there are many high school students who don't even know the multiplication table. If you do know about the Gamma function, as I hope you do, why not add an explanatory comment? (And maybe plug the formula into Mathematica to see that it really works.) If you don't know about the Gamma function, then most likely you don't care at all about this area of mathematical physics, so why bother? Why not turn your attention to articles about the subjects you have a minimum of expertise?

Go ahead, butcher this page. But think about the collateral damage - your petty policing is disenchanting your fellow editors. I am a practicing theoretical physicist, I don't have much time anyway. PhysicsAboveAll (talk) 08:47, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]


A draft

[edit]

@Ldm1954

Hi Ldm1954, nice to meet you. I noticed you marked the AfC Draft:Jan Zarzycki. Do you think it is not currently good enough to accept? Take into account that the Polish language article has been published. Your question concerning contribution is not supported by all references (see e.g. DONA). Thank you, ‪KSz at OWPTM Chris KSz at OWPTM (talk) 12:56, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whether there is a Polish language page is not relevant, different WP have different stdndards. There have been no changes to the page that make it meet the standards of WP:NPROF, and I do not understand what you mean by "see e.g. DONA". Ldm1954 (talk) 13:38, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dona is the another reference in article Jan Zarzycki.[1][2] KSz at OWPTM (talk) 09:54, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See also details of academic activities and contributions Zarzycki, Jan (1998). Cyfrowa filtracja ortogonalna sygnałów losowych. Układy i Systemy Elektroniczne. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Naukowo-Techniczne. ISBN 978-83-204-2245-0.; [3][2][4][5][6][7] KSz at OWPTM (talk) 11:03, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It means that you claim "he has a total of 8 publications" is not true. Some databases are not refreshed, however there are some relevant information there not available in another one. KSz at OWPTM (talk) 11:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately the creating editor chose to promote this to become an article. Since WP:DRAFTOBJECT prevented unilateral redraftification (what a word!) I have sent it to AfD quoting your AFC comment. It's regrettable when editors don't take advice. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 20:09, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with your comment about leeway. I am in total agreement up to but not beyond the point when the novice editor 'knows best' and moves a draft to mainspace. Leeway and AFC go hand in glove. Unless, of course, one is sailing, when I prefer not to wear gloves expect im winter 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 20:52, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear All involved in discussion on the Jan Zarzycki biogram! Nice to hear that you try to evalate the man based on my short text. However, I do not see real understanding of him.
I'm very sorry,but I don't see the connection of these comments with the facts also.
The authors of the comments didn't read the references in the article, they didn't take the trouble to understand anything from what is relevant in the bio. They do not know the realities of others but from their surroundings and do not want to develop Wikipedia.
I state the above because: JZarzycki did research on important and difficult issues in signal analysis. He wrote widely known research reports and monographs on this subject (Springer publisher), went through all levels of scientific career - a path recognized not only in Poland but in most countries. In a difficult procedure to pass - not for tenure but for dignity - he obtained confirmation of his rank from the hand of the President of Poland.
Reference databases continue to be supplemented with his achievements-which had a chance to be added on his Wikipedia bio.
However, a thoughtless act of vandalism resulted in the removal of the article about him.
@Ldm1954@Timtrent@Liz@KJs KSz at OWPTM (talk) 15:39, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@KSz at OWPTM And yet you chose not to contribute to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan Zarzycki which opened on 20th and closed on 27th May 2025 as Delete. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 20:44, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Dorobek naukowy Politechniki Wrocławskiej (baza DONA)". dona.pwr.edu.pl. Retrieved 2025-02-04.
  2. ^ a b Zarzycki, Jan (2025). "Scopus". Elsevier B.V. (in Polish).{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  3. ^ "Dorobek naukowy Politechniki Wrocławskiej (baza DONA)". dona.pwr.edu.pl. Retrieved 2025-02-04.
  4. ^ Zarzycki, Jan. "Promotorstwa doktoratów". omnis-pwr.primo.exlibrisgroup.com. Retrieved 2025-02-04.
  5. ^ Zarzycki, Jan (1986). Nieliniowa prognoza i modelowanie stochastyczne sygnałów losowych wyższego rzędu [Nonlinear forecasting and stochastic modeling of higher-order random signals] (in Polish) (Prace Naukowe Instytutu Telekomunikacji i Akustyki Politechniki Wrocławskiej. ed.). Wrocław: Politechnika Wrocławska. p. 130.
  6. ^ Zarzycki, Jan (1985). Nonlinear prediction ladder-filters for higher-order stochastic sequences. Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences. Vol. 73. Berlin: Springer. p. 132. doi:10.1007/BFb0007210.
  7. ^ Maksymilian A. Górski, Karol Grudziński, Robert Hossa, Wiesław Madej, Janusz Śliwiński, Jan Zarzycki. Patent. Polska, nr PL 214221, opubl. 31.07.2013. Zgłosz. nr 381887 z 02.03.2007 . Urządzenia sterujące. Wojskowy Instytut Techniki Inżynieryjnej im. prof. Józefa Kosackiego ; 3 s.

Re: Your email

[edit]

Your concerns are noted, but their threat is meaningless and meant only to intimidate you. Can you point me to the AFD in question? You may also want to look at WP:911 for more help. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:38, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fellow of IAWS

[edit]

Fellow of IAWS; Allow me please, your point is not correct. This is the highest recognition in the scientific area of wood sciences. Please kindly check the below. The Fellows are elected every year; [1]

Quote from the website: Fellows of the IAWS are wood scientists who are elected as actively engaged in wood research in the broadest sense, their election being evidence of high scientific standards. New Fellows are nominated and evaluated by Fellows. The Executive Committee determines the number of nominees to be accepted as Fellows each year, based on those evaluations - It is not a membership thing.

See also these websites [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. G-Lignum (talk) 11:54, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Meetup for July 13

[edit]

Hello! This is Luiysia again. Hope everyone has been having a great summer! Here are the details for our July bimonthly meetup, which will be a Wiknic.

The meetup will start at Welles Park, in the Ravenswood neighborhood, at 2 PM on July 13.

Here is the official meetup page, where you can add yourself as an attendee.

(If you would prefer not to see messages for Chicago meetups, go ahead and take yourself off this list.)

See you soon!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:27, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Russell Surasky

[edit]

Response to Scott Russell Surasky Revert

[edit]

Thank you for your message regarding my edits to Scott Russell Surasky. I’m addressing your concern about the *The Hill* and *Economic Times* sources returning 404 errors, as noted in your revert on 21 June 2025.

As of 21 June 2025, both links are live and accessible:

It’s possible you encountered temporary server issues or regional restrictions. Could you confirm if these links now work for you? If the 404 errors persist, I’m happy to provide alternative sources or assist in formatting the citations correctly.

Thank you for your time and for maintaining Wikipedia’s standards. I look forward to your feedback. Neurodoc99 (talk) 21:07, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you look carefully, you will see that the links you provide above are different from those you used before. The ones that were in the article were https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/4344334-biden-mental-health-diagnosis-goldwater-rule and https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/us/doctors-analyze-bidens-cognition-after-debate/articleshow/104719817.cms. That those were invalid sources was previously pointed out to you by Alpha3031. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:23, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nami Kartal

[edit]

I place here some arguments: In this article (Nami Kartal), it seems that the subject has the required notability:

a) absolute citations at GS exceed the no. of 4,300 citations (reasonable for this narrow field of specialization, wood science), with an h-index of 38 [8]; b) he additionally is an elected fellow of a recognised academy (named IAWS) [9]; also, c) he is a highly-ranked researcher, being included in the Stanford top 2% scientists list [10]. Notice also at Google Scholar that he has nine (9) research papers, each has been cited more than 100 times. Thanks for your kindness to re-evaluate these points. G-Lignum (talk) 08:40, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I pondered this for a bit. I remain of the opinion that the 2% list does not confer notability, and that is what the concensus was. I remain, similarly, not impressed by the IAWS Fellowship, which was also the concensus. The arguments in the other case of papers with significant numbers of individual cites is also far weaker. Therefore I am not going to change my opinion, sorry. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:22, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unsigned comment

[edit]

Hi, just a quick note: your comment here is missing a signature. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 16:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I Would Like To Apologize

[edit]

Sorry. If your wondering who I am, I'm the person who made the page Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), which was a redirect copy of Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Also the problem with the page Cheyenne & Arapaho Tribes., which was also a redirect copy of Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes. I would like to apologize for the misinformation of Héctor Leyva Chávez, and I'm sincerely sorry for my past mistakes for being disruptive, disrespectful, and a "copier". I will learn from my mistakes and start being a better example on Wikipedia. Sorry Ldm1954, Ponyo, and MPGuy2824. RayRayM1604 (talk) 01:07, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To err is human. Ldm1954 (talk) 01:56, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Matteo Paz awards removal

[edit]

Hello! You removed the navbox "Awards for Matteo Paz" on Matteo Paz's page, and I was wondering why so? Personally I think it should be kept but I wanted to ask your reasoning and opinion.

Thank you! User01938 (talk) 06:46, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was definitely WP:Peacock. Reviewing the page as part of WP:NPP there is clearly the issue of WP:BLP1E/WP:BIO1E. Adding puffery such as the quote and WP:MILL about going to a university does not help. Ldm1954 (talk) 10:49, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can I add the {{Regeneron Science Talent Search}} navbox back without the collapsible navbox? User01938 (talk) 16:55, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am very dubious about the merit of that template. Let's wait for a few more opinions on the notability of that template. Ldm1954 (talk) 17:24, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftifying duplicates.

[edit]

If you want to draftify that page you may use Draft:Yoel Rak (2) (this is not entirely uncontroversial but is widely practiced). Or you can simply list at WP:AFD, see WP:AFDHOWTO for details. The appropriate RCAT template when redirecting drafts to their mainspace equivalent is Template:R from Draft. Going forward please only tag pages for WP:CSD that meet the criteria listed there, thank you. 204.111.137.20 (talk) 02:27, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ldm1954&oldid=1298499589"