User talk:Thezamirs

Nomination of Convergence acceleration by the Ford-Sidi W(m) algorithm for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Convergence acceleration by the Ford-Sidi W(m) algorithm is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Convergence acceleration by the Ford-Sidi W(m) algorithm until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Pontificalibus 08:48, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

December 2018

A few comments and pieces of advice regarding your recent editing.

Please don't create multiple copies of a page, as you did at Convergence acceleration by the Ford-Sidi W(m) algorithm, Convergence acceleration by Ford-Sidi W(m) algorithm, Draft:Applying D(m) Transformation to Hankel Transforms, User:Thezamirs/sandbox, and Draft:Convergence Acceleration By The w(m) Algorithm. I am puzzled as to what useful purpose you expected to achieve by doing so, but whatever your reason it is unhelpful, as it can make it difficult and confusing for editors to keep track of what is going on, and in the case of multiple copies of an article it can lead to new edits not being coordinated across the copies of the article. Also, creating a new copy of a page while it is subject to a deletion discussion runs the risk that some editors may suspect that it is done as a way of trying to evade possible outcome of that discussion.
Your exclusive concentration on editing in relation to one piece of work gives the impression that you may have a personal connection to that piece of work. If so, before doing any more editing you should read Wikipedia's guideline on conflict of interest, if you haven't already done so. Also if this is new research then you should read the policy on original research.
You should also look at guidelines on notability. It seems likely that the topic you have written about may not satisfy those guidelines, in which case it will not be suitable as the subject of a Wikipedia article.
A fairly large number of aspects of the writing style are not appropriate, beginning with the way you launch straight into the middle of your subject without explaining what it is that you are writing about, continuing through the article as though you assume that the readers of the encyclopaedia already know the background, the use of "we", which is not in line with Wikipedia's manual of style, such things as "We propose here..." as Wikipedia articles should not propose, advocate, or promote anything. There are many more such problems throughout the article. My advice to new editors is that it is best to start by making small improvements to existing articles, rather than creating new articles. That way any mistakes you make will be small ones, and you won't have the discouraging experience of repeatedly seeing hours of work deleted. Gradually, you will get to learn how Wikipedia works, and after a while you will know enough about what is acceptable to be able to write whole new articles without fear that they will be deleted. Over the years I have found that editors who start by making small changes to existing articles and work up from there have a far better chance of having a successful time here than those who jump right into creating new articles from the start. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 17:03, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. Can you please explain why you want more than one copy of the same page? If you can't then I shall delete the duplicate copy of the article that you have created in user space. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:15, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have not answered the above message, despite the fact that you have edited a number of times since I posted it, over a period of more than 24 hours, so you have certainly had opportunities to answer it. I have therefore deleted the page, which appears to have been an attempt to use Wikipedia as a web host to hold your work, rather than being a contribution to the encyclopaedia. You are very welcome indeed to start making useful contributions to the encyclopaedia if you would like to, but if you continue to attempt to use Wikipedia to publish your work you will be blocked from editing. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:09, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request to recover the content of a sandbox page

I have read the message posted by this account on my talk page. Normally I reply to any message on the page to which it was posted, to prevent discussions from becoming fragmented. On this occasion, however, it seems to me that it may be convenient to have all the comments relating to your editing together on one page, so I am copying the message that was posted to my talk page here, and answering it below. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:23, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear James, I'm writing to you in the name of my father (67 years old, he is new to Wikipedia). He mistakenly used his sandbox page to create an article which does not meet the Wikipedia guidelines. The contents of the page are very important to him and he had been working on it for a long time (he is currently hospitalized and it is his only hobby). I understand why you deleted the page, but ask you to please provide him with the last content of the page so that he can back it up and use it somewhere else. I can guarantee that he won't reuse the sandbox page in this way. The page URL is the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Thezamirs/sandbox&action=edit&redlink=1 Thank you Thezamirs (talk) 18:31, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First of all a small point about use of this account. I assume from what you say that most of the editing from this account has been from one man, with the post to my talk page being made by his daughter or son. Wikipedia policy is that accounts should not be shared between people, so if the son or daughter wants to post again he or she should create a new account. Don't worry about the fact that you didn't do that before: all of us, when we first start editing Wikipedia, do so without knowing all the policies and guidelines, so most of us make mistakes, but please follow that policy if you edit again. The following comments are addressed to the father, but obviously the son or daughter may be interested in them too. While it is of no importance or relevance, I will just mention that I too am sixty seven years old.

I will restore the sandbox for you. If, as seems almost certain, the article is eventually deleted, I will also delete the sandbox, unless you can give a reason why I shouldn't do so. The deletion discussion will probably be closed on 22 December (a week after it was opened) and I hope that will give you enough time to rescue any content from it, but I am willing to give you a few more days' grace if you need it. It could happen that another administrator will delete the sandbox before you have a chance to save its contents, but I think that is unlikely, and if it does happen we can make other arrangements, such as perhaps emailing it to you. (Don't post your email address to Wikipedia. If it becomes necessary I will tell you how to enable Wikipedia email forwarding, without making your address publicly visible.)

I am sorry that your first experience of editing Wikipedia has been a rather negative one. That must be particularly disappointing while you are in hospital: unfortunately I know myself how barren life in a hospital can be, and having something to do while you are there is important. I will offer a few comments which I hope may be helpful. It seems to me that there are two aspects of the work you have been doing: your investigation of convergence acceleration using the Ford-Sidi algorithm, and your editing Wikipedia. The problem with combining the two together is that Wikipedia policy does not permit publishing of original research. (If it is of any interest to you, when I first started editing Wikipedia I was astonished to learn that. I thought that an encyclopaedia that anyone could edit gave an ideal opportunity to publish original research, and I could not understand why it was not allowed. However, as I gained experience of how Wikipedia works I came to realise that there are very good reasons behind that policy.) If you wish to publish your research then you will have to do it somewhere else. You may like to look at the page Wikipedia:Alternative outlets, which gives suggestions as to where else you can post content that is not acceptable on Wikipedia. If, on the other hand, you are interested in contributing to Wikipedia in other ways apart from posting the result of your own research, then you are very welcome indeed to do so. However, my advice to new editors is that it is best to start by making small improvements to existing articles, rather than creating new articles. That way any mistakes you make will be small ones, and you won't have the discouraging experience of repeatedly seeing hours of work deleted. Gradually, you will get to learn how Wikipedia works, and after a while you will know enough about what is acceptable to be able to write whole new articles without fear that they will be deleted. Over the years I have found that editors who start by making small changes to existing articles and work up from there have a far better chance of having a successful time here than those who jump right into creating new articles from the start.

If you do choose to continue contributing to Wikipedia then I hope from now on you will have a successful time doing so. If yo have any questions about contributing then you are welcome to ask me, or you can ask for help at Wikipedia:Help desk. Obviously I have no idea why you are in hospital or how serious your condition is, but I wish you well. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:23, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have now copied the content of your sandbox elsewhere, so I have deleted the sandbox. However, there is a problem with your user page. A Wikipedia user page is for someone who is active in working for the project to give a little information about himself or herself in connection with his or her work for the encyclopaedia: it is not a place to post a personal web page, unrelated to work for Wikipedia. Nor is it acceptable to use any kind of Wikipedia page for the purpose of publicising content published on other web sites. You are, of course, very welcome to make contributions to the encyclopaedia, in line with Wikipedia policies and guidelines, but if your purpose is to publicise your work or to publish an online CV or résumé, then Wikipedia is not the right place to do so. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 22:17, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]