User talk:Baba Arouj

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Baba Arouj, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! RJFJR (talk) 14:51, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 29 July[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Turing completeness page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:22, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Schelling's model of segregation[edit]

The sentence you've added in this edit is problematic in several ways:

it is incomprehensible in context (who is Sakoda? what is Sakoda's model?)
it is added to the introduction but it does not summarize any part of the body (MOS:INTRO)
as written, its main assertion is that Hegselmann demonstrated something; that claim seems beside the point and the source (the work of Hegselmann) is a primary source for that claim. Instead, it should be replaced by a sentence whose main assertion is about the model, for which the work of Hegselmann could serve as a secondary source.

Since the history and attribution of the model obviously merit coverage in the article, and the source appears to be a valuable addition, I would be grateful if you could correct these issues. --JBL (talk) 21:40, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not having received a response, I've reverted your edit -- but I would very much like to discuss with you reincorporating some of this material into the article. --JBL (talk) 19:57, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you please do as you wish. As pointed out by the work of Hegselmann, it is a shame that the name of Sakoda is not mentioned when discussing Schelling's model. I recently evoqued this point in a scientific conference, where the speaker did not know about the pioneering work of Sakoda. Eric Goles uses the name Sakoda when he mentions this model. I don't have any objection if this name remains in the shadow again… Baba Arouj (talk) 14:54, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Baba Arouj,

Thanks very much for your response. You raise the question of what I wish; what I wish is if you could assist in adding material to the article, using your evident expertise and familiarity with the sources, but in a way that is understandable by a reader who lacks your background knowledge and is compatible with our guidelines. If you were willing, I would be happy to workshop such an addition with you, either here on on the article talk-page -- let me know. (I have this page watchlisted, so if you repond here I will see it.)

Thanks,

JBL (talk) 18:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for kind answer JBL. If you have some time, I simply suggest that you read either Hegselmann's article or Jack McDonald's post and edit a paragraph accordingly. I've already said more or less what I had to say; I can also make a control of the result if you wish.

yours,

Baba Arouj (talk) Baba Arouj (talk) 22:33, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]