User talk:Barraki

Manga Kids article

Their article refers to him as the sixth because Jeremie counts as one of the first five. They're a reliable source. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 22:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Wardrobe malfunction. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. --Yamla 22:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue spamming you will be blocked from editing. --Yamla 22:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A-spot

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article A-spot, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Tmtoulouse 19:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

U-spot

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article U-spot, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Tmtoulouse 19:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HPW

That's true, but unfortunately isn't the point. I have made a few edits there, but it is clear the coverage is generally not a patch on what is here. It would be impossible for just a few people to do the work needed to bring it up to the standard here. The other difficulty I saw was that while I did write a couple of articles, two people (and there aren't many editors) observed that my articles looked awfully like the ones on wikipedia. Well, of course they did, I wrote them. So, the issue is whether to argue about fine points for improving an already pretty good set of articles here, or start from scratch. On the whole there may be an interesting month ahead, but then the massive rewites begin. Sandpiper 20:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Colleague

Dear colleague please can you contact me at boubaker_karem@yahoo.com ?? thank you

Precision on work of Maurice Allais

Hello Barraki, maybe it would be interesting to detail your contribution [1]. Besides the mere fact that he wrote a refutation, what are the arguments and the conclusions of Roger Balian? The same for the fact that Maurice Allais writes also about history of physics. Many renowned physicists mix physics and epistemology in papers or textbooks in order to shed light on the manner how physical concepts emerge. That's not a particularity of Maurice Allais. Regards. Arjen Dijksman 08:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Power rangers

The article you submitted to DRV is at User:Barraki/Enhancement Modes in Power Rangers. Give me a shout when you're done with it.-Wafulz 05:56, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll admit I'm new at this. If you have to move it into the mainspace, you can go ahead and do that (just make sure to link to here in your move summary).-Wafulz 19:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

common logarithm

The image you added to common logarithm was inappropriate. One of the graphs was that of the natural logarithm function, not the common (i.e. base-10) logarithm function; the others were not graphs of logarithmic functions at all, and there was no explanation of what the number n was supposed to be. If you look at that graph's own page, it does explain what n is, and it's not appropriate for the article about base-10 logarithms. Michael Hardy 20:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Colleague

Dear colleague would you please see

http://www.neva.ru/journal/j/EN/numbers/2007.2/issue.html

and then contact me (if you are objective) at boubaker_karem@yahoo.com