Jump to content

User talk:Bera678

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Liz (talk | contribs) at 20:06, 19 July 2024 (Notification: speedy deletion of Draft:Intercultural interactions.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome

Hello, 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 name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! — Anita5192 (talk) 22:42, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 2023

Information icon Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Imaginary unit, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. — MATRIX! (a good person!)[citation unneeded] 21:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Matrix thanks Bera678 (talk) 21:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop editing Imaginary unit to say that square roots give positive numbers. "Positive" has no meaning for complex non-real numbers. JBW (talk) 21:25, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW Sorry i made a mistake Bera678 (talk) 21:32, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Imaginary unit. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you. DVdm (talk) 17:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note regarding my revert: we link only once to a specific article. See wp:REPEATLINK: "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article" - DVdm (talk) 17:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Warning icon Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Almost integer, you may be blocked from editing. DVdm (talk) 14:19, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But I just added the same reference from another wikipedia article. What's the problem? Bera678 (talk) 14:21, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You did not add a reference. You added a note without any kind of source: [1] - DVdm (talk) 14:26, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, i didn't. I am sure i am added a reference. Bera678 (talk) 14:54, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You added an unsourced note. Just look at what you did with [2]. Tell me what you see... - DVdm (talk) 15:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I confused the problem you mentioned with another edit I made. Bera678 (talk) 15:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User:DVdm. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. DVdm (talk) 00:31, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry DVDdm_, I didn't mean to attack you, I was just angry at you and wanted to take it out on you. Bera678 (talk) 14:30, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fabien Vienne (December 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Qcne were:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Vastly undersourced.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Qcne (talk) 20:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Bera678! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Qcne (talk) 20:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fabien Vienne (December 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Approx half the content is unreferenced – where is this information coming from? (And Facebook is not a reliable source.)
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fabien Vienne (December 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
www.fabienvienne.com is not an independent source.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Theroadislong (talk) 19:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fabien Vienne (December 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by NoobThreePointOh was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
NoobThreePointOh (talk) 10:50, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop inserting redundant links. See WP:REPEATLINK, WP:OVERLINK, and Note above.—Anita5192 (talk) 17:05, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry i am just new wikipedist Bera678 (talk) 15:46, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
After DVdm and Anita5192 have both mentioned this to you, you have still continued to add links to articles which already contain the same links: for example, in the article Multilinear algebra you linked to Outer product, although there was already a link to there. Please try to avoid making the same mistake again. JBW (talk) 20:48, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I read Wikipedia's guide to links and what I did didn't seem wrong to me. I'll be more careful next time Bera678 (talk) 08:34, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's very simple. As I said above, see wp:REPEATLINK: "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article" - DVdm (talk) 16:15, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Level-set method

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Level-set method, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (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, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 18:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bera678: with this edit to article Level-set method you added a bare URL as a reference, supporting the claim that "equation 2 can be applied analogously to the other properties of the fluids." As there was an automatically detected problem with your edit —see above— to which you have not responded, I have cast the reference into a proper format ([3]), but a problem remains: I have a copy of the book and I didn't find equation 2 in it. On exactly which page in the book (and in which chapter and section) do they actually show equation 2? - DVdm (talk) 09:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bera678: can you please answer the above question? Thanks. - DVdm (talk) 16:32, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to add a general resource to the section. I didn't mean to directly support any claims. To be honest, I didn't read the text completely, I was just looking for a source by looking at the title. I'm sorry if I caused confusion. Bera678 (talk) 17:58, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, no problem. But not a good idea. The idea of sources is to provide wp:verifiability. I have removed the section entirely, as it was tagged since August 2022: [4]. - DVdm (talk) 18:28, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See also section

Regarding my revert of your edit, see wp:NOTSEEALSO: "As a general rule, the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body." - DVdm (talk) 16:13, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid any misunderstanding, DVdm is right. I say that because I accidentally clicked on the "thank" link for your edit, which is likely to give the impression that I agreed with that edit. My apologies for the confusion. JBW (talk) 20:25, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Bera678 (talk) 08:37, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Manual of style

Information icon Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in 1 − 2 + 3 − 4 + ⋯. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Thank you.

With this edit, you have not "Fixed a math template". you turned properly formatted math into badly formatted math. - DVdm (talk) 14:31, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Idk, what i did wrong? With the edit I made, the thing next to the template disappeared. Isn't it better this way? Bera678 (talk) 14:55, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just compare the original [5] with your version [6]. Tell me what you see... - DVdm (talk) 15:01, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Almost same, only the thing next to the template disappeared. Am I not seeing the problem? Bera678 (talk) 15:05, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The indentation is gone and the alignment of the equal signs has disappeared. Don't you see that? - DVdm (talk) 15:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Only this? I can't think this is a problem. I don't mean to sound rude, but couldn't you have edited this yourself, you must be a master wikipedist after all. It's ridiculous that you've taken up so much of my time because of this. Bera678 (talk) 15:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Only this. You turned a good looking formula into a mess. You could have spotted that by looking at the formatting of the original formulas in the context of the remainder of the math in the article. - DVdm (talk) 15:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK :( Bera678 (talk) 15:25, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fabien Vienne (December 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Theroadislong (talk) 15:33, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Manual of style, revisited

Regarding this, please see my edit summary. - DVdm (talk) 20:36, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Despite messages above, you continue to add inappropriate wikilinks to articles. You have already been given a link to WP:OVERLINK and if you haven't read it yet then I encourage you to do so now. Generally speaking, a wikilink should be added only if it provides information which is likely to help readers of the article in which the link is placed to understand content of that article, or provide further information closely connected to content of that article. That normally means a link to a page which either explains words or expressions in the article or provides background information which is necessary in order to understand content of that article. Linking to articles in other situations is not just unnecessary, it is actually harmful, because research has established that the more irrelevant, or only slightly relevant, links there are in a page, the less likely readers are to find the ones which they are likely to find useful. Thus, for example, nobody reading the article E-patient is likely to need to consult the article Europe in order to understand what "Europe" means, nor does the article Europe contain any information about E-patients, so linking the one to the other is not likely to be helpful. If you keep on doing things which you have been warned about, you are likely to be blocked from editing by an administrator. It may seem that blocking you for such a minor thing would be silly, but if asking you to stop doesn't work, then a block may be the only way to stop you. If you really don't understand why the links you have been adding are seen as unhelpful after you have read the guidelines and advice, then probably the best thing will be for you to stop adding any wikilinks at all. JBW (talk) 21:51, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Intercultural interactions (January 19)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Mach61 were:
This submission reads more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. Submissions should summarise information in secondary, reliable sources and not contain opinions or original research. Please write about the topic from a neutral point of view in an encyclopedic manner.
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Intercultural interactions instead.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
Mach61 (talk) 20:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

retired yui science xatrAAQUARIUM 2603:9001:3A00:4A58:2422:2CAC:BD10:F59D (talk) 19:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to inform you that an image you've added to the Desmos article has been removed.

You added an image to that article in the past. And it got removed from Wikimedia Commons thus it got removed from that article as well. Jothefiredragon🐲talk🐉edits 09:23, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Intercultural interactions

Information icon Hello, Bera678. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Intercultural interactions, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Intercultural interactions

Hello, Bera678. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Intercultural interactions".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 20:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bera678&oldid=1235537171"