Talk:SigSpec

Untitled
The article “SigSpec” does not promote anything and is not intended as an advertisement. It is the description of a novel statistical concept increasingly accepted in astronomy and has the potential to be relevant to a variety of sciences dealing with time series analysis.

The SigSpec method addresses the problem of an accurate and statistically clean detection of signals in noisy datasets, and no person or company profits from its public acceptance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PietTempest (talk • contribs)


 * But its increased acceptance might do wonders for the academic career of the P. Reegen who seems to be the person behind the concept and is cited on each and almost every paper footnoted here. Are you, by chance, the P. Reegen in question, Piet? -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:31, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

This is not by chance, see User:PietTempest.

1. All of these footnotes (which is not a complete list by far) are refereed publications in established scientific journals rather than advertisements. Each and every entry in the list represents scientific work that has undergone the review by a qualified scientist.

2. My name somewhere in the list of authors means that the first author decided to employ the SigSpec method for his scientific analysis and asked me to add a brief explanation to the paper myself. The decision upon the appropriate tool to extract the best research is NOT up to a third (or whatever) author.

3. I cannot take the argument concerning my academic career serious. Since I am not aware of a single scientific publication relying on or referring to a Wikipedia article, I consider the influence on my career marginal. The average scientist finds his own point of view rather than reiterates information from the internet without a critical examination. Wikipedia may be an important source of information for a broad community, its particular influence on the scientific community is questionable.

4. Considering the removal of the hangon tag, I understand the Wikipedia policy to permit a single person to decide upon killing an article. Please correct me, if I am wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.113.138.171 (talk) 22:18, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * To address the most important concern first, the removal of the "hangon" tag is because that tag is a specialized one which is only used on articles nominated for speedy deletion. Since nobody is proposing this article for immediate deletion, that tag was the wrong one to use.
 * As to the rest: working on Wikipedia for long periods leads one to a certain surly suspiciousness about the eagerness of the whole world to pump up their reputations by splattering themselves all over Wikipedia. As a result, it has been suggested that we have acquired a certain ugly tendency towards hostility towards subject-matter experts. In the case of so esoteric a field as this, the outcome can be a somewhat inappropriate tone of suspicion when a specialized field is being addressed by one of the planet's few experts on the topic. You may have become a textbook example of this syndrome in action, Piet; and I can only offer my apologies if that is what it felt like to you.
 * I sincerely hope you continue to contribute here, and especially that you further expand your attention to areas not directly related to SigSpec, where I know for a fact where can always use an expert eye.-- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:41, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Since I am working in astronomy, a field frequently mixed up with astrology and therefore occasionally abused as a platform for charlatanism by Johnny-come-latelies, I think I can imagine the problems you have attempting to keep this platform clean and reliable. And the job you do is a great one! I have been consulting Wikipedia for years as a source of all kinds of information, and the quantity and quality of things to find out here is really remarkable! I will try to participate actively also in other contexts related to my field, I promise. And thank you for your understanding... —Preceding unsigned comment added by PietTempest (talk • contribs) 08:21, 30 October 2009 (UTC)