Welcome!
Hello, X7q, 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 messages on discussion pages using 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 ask your question on this page and then place ((helpme))
before the question. Again, welcome!
John Vandenberg (chat) 10:01, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
You must not start editing these articles and changing all the terms in there, such as feedforward to feed forward. THese are terms that are normally joined.
Chaosdruid (talk) 14:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Why did you mark as "spam" and also delete the link to www.wordfrequency.info for the [n-grams] article? Can you point me to another n-grams set that is as complete as that from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA), other than the Google and Microsoft n-grams sets? And unlike the Google and Microsoft data, the n-grams from COCA are the only ones based on a large, well-balanced corpus (e.g. spoken, fiction, popular magazines, newspapers, and academic). The COCA n-grams are being used at a number of universities worldwide, and COCA itself is arguably the most widely-used corpus now available (about 60,000 unique users each month -- far more than the BNC, BoE, OEC, etc). Again, can you provide some rationale for marking this "spam"? If not, I will again include an external link to this. Lingprofe (talk) 01:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I got your message and I've read the guidelines, of course I agree, but I strongly believe that my site should stay at the "defragmentation" page at least.
And no, it's not selling anything. As for the other pages where I've added it, I reviewed them and you were right, some of them just aren't related. So feel free to remove the URL from any other page except the "defragmentation" one. And no, I'm not looking for any SEO benefits, I know what "no-follow" tags mean, don't worry about that...
best regards, Alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleksandar030 (talk • contribs) 01:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Can I please ask you to think twice about that one? The site teaches people basic defragmentation principles (on a language they understand, as easy as possible) and gives them information they seek for. The bounce rate is very low which means they read everything they find over there. If you don't want my site (I'm not going to lie like others might - it's my site) included over there, that's ok, I could care less, but believe me when I tell you, it does provide your users value, and as for ads, they barely pay hosting fees so I don't have to pay that at least... Heck, even ads provide them value if they locate something of interest...
I'm not a stubborn man, I'll leave it alone, but you think about this for a second...
best, Alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleksandar030 (talk • contribs) 02:04, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Why do I need to add it just to get a response from you? Nevermind...
Anyway, I want to know why do you think it's "made for adsense"?
Tell me, where do you think a line exists between "made for adsense" and sites like this. What would've made you think it's not "made for adsense"? I really want to know what I'm doing wrong and what should I do to make it "not made for adsense"?
I never wanted it to become "made for adsense", obviously I did something wrong, so bear with me on this one and don't make me add it one more time to get a response from you.
Let me know what you think and we can all move on, and don't worry I won't include it anymore, I just had a feeling you'll post a response and if it's an accident (I actually added it today, and voila there's a response from you) I'm really sorry, I see you already altered everything so no big damage is done...
best, Alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleksandar030 (talk • contribs) 10:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi X7q! I changed the name of the template sections to be more explanatory to general readers. "Methods using gradients" is more understandable than "first order methods", don't you agree? Why do you prefer your suggestions? Sincerely, Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk) 22:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I'm a bit confused with your comment unsourced, OR ("which show that ...")). Do I have to include screen capture of Google's search result to show it really happened?
Hensem (talk) 12:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
You appear to have removed my edits to Yandex page; can I assume that you have a commercial interest in Yandex itself? Remember http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars !
I run several websites and have seen as many as 190 separate browser sessions created by Yandex webbot from a single IP address. This behaviour, in my opinion, makes it an unfriendly bot.
WhiskyGolf (talk) 05:32, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
I can't be bothered; I didn't ask them on to my site so robots.txt, here I come. Hopefully the webbot will be decent enough to honour robots.txt WhiskyGolf (talk) 21:23, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohen%E2%80%93Sutherland — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kapil.xerox (talk • contribs) 01:03, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi X7q: I'm a little puzzled by this reversion to my edit on Google platform, since I'm not sure how "a widely used within the company binary serialization format" forms a complete sentence. I read the entire sentence, and it still doesn't make any sense. Since "widely used" needs to be followed by a noun, which is missing, I'm concerned as to the logic of the sense after the current edit. Maybe "term" wasn't the right word to insert there, but can you explain the logic behind your revision a bit more to me? Maybe "a widely used abstraction" would be appropriate, because that's what the section is referring to in general? Thank you! άλφα7248Talk 18:10, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XRumer here link to official site is Incorrect and why somebody always changes correct link to incorrect one oficial site is www.botmasterlabs.net.
You can go to russian article about XRumer http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/XRumer
And to see correct link to RUSSIAN site, then go to that site and to see in top Right corner Link to English site and it will be www.botmasterlabs.net
Regards,
ALXuMuK (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:08, 16 April 2011 (UTC).
Hi, and thanks for correcting my error. I've come to the page to correct it when I realized it was wrong, and it was corrected already. I've got confused measuring it in Haskell, where the complexity is worse in the first place, for the code I was measuring. There it indeed had an enormous impact on both speed and complexity. Thanks! WillNess (talk) 07:42, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
I reverted the guy's insert & didnt insert anything. Probably the link was already in the previous version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.211.120.196 (talk) 21:25, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
I clarified the edit further. I'm going to post some reasoning for the edit I made in the talk page. 83.183.40.68 (talk) 11:28, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Hey, I'm not a power-user of Wikipedia and generally do minor edits, but I saw your suggestion from 5 months ago to delete a section of the Bayesian article, and I think instead it should be reverted instead to just get rid of the changes made to that section... i don't know if we "undo" his edits if it also "undoes" the edits done after him, which are on other sections and are good... Deproduction (talk) 03:44, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi --
Hey, please don't undo without comment. You may want to re-read this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Reverting -- when people make a good faith effort to add something, reverting without comment and then accusing of spam (for what appears to be a non commercial wiki) is not appropriate. --Quasipalm (talk) 05:14, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi. You have Undid my new topic at the talk page about google search with explanation : WP:NOTFORUM. but this is talk page. I would like to show some properities of result which makes using it hard. It is possible to show short form of www adress but google search sometimes does not do it. Regards. --Adam majewski (talk) 19:47, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I see you created the page on Margaret Masterman. I was astonished to find it. I knew her and worked with her and have some additional information. Before I add it, please review the Margaret Masterman talk page where I have put my information. Robotics1 (talk) 21:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Internet Problem Solving Contest 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/Internet Problem Solving Contest until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Msnicki (talk) 22:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello X7q,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Internet Problem Solving Contest for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.
TheLongTone (talk) 16:06, 22 January 2018 (UTC)