User talk:62.202.181.251

February 2018
Hello, I'm Acroterion. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to CIE 1931 color space have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks.  Acroterion   (talk)   03:17, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.


 * I don't like to be destructive, but sorry, I think what I tried to correct (and has been reverted) and also my ignored comments in Talk are related on knowledge! Regards


 * I'm thinking about to be more active on this theme, because this theme is my profession. But in wiki it looks like that I'm lost. Can you help me on this? I mean can you support me in a way like a mentor?


 * Certainly. I suggest that you register an account so you can be found in the 'pedia - IP addresses change occasionally. Second, when you want to link to something else in Wikipedia you use pairs of square brackets, like so: foo . Third, everything should be derived from a published source and appropriately referenced. And fourth, please sign talkpage posts with four tildes - ~, which will automatically insert a signature. Don't put commentary or questions into articles. Let me know if/when you register an account, and happy editing!  Acroterion   (talk)   03:50, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * "Third, everything should be derived from a published source and appropriately referenced":


 * Sorry for this, but please explain where CIE-Y (1963)and "color display" are derived? It is not, it is only silly, sorry! I try to give my best to help.
 * Just looking for my account introduced years ago (never used, because wiki always undo my contributions), something like ColorMatters....


 * Hard to tell, that's why we want sources, but old, low-traffic articles may not have been updated or might be just plain wrong. As Wikipoedia has become more, erm, professional, we've insisted on pretty rigorous sourcing. If you've gor reference material at hand, by all means correct it and source it. You're also free to correct it as long as you discuss why you're doing it on the talkpage, but it's simple to defend your edits if you've backed them up, as opposed to "it's wrong and I know it."  Acroterion   (talk)   04:16, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Nope! I think, I don't have to deliver sources for articles which are wrong! If old articles are there (without sources) it is a problem of wiki... your statement turns me now not to start to contribute at wiki
 * And it is crazy, that youngsters here decide what will be published. Youngsters who have no real knowledge about things like CIE... sad....
 * You do have to provide sources, just like you did in college - that prevents arguments, and it's policy. That also means that the references decide what's published, not individual editors, young or old. See if you can find a reference for the appropriate material from its time - I write about long-dead architects and have references going back 120 years (I only go back 59 years personally). When you resurrect pre-Internet sources you're doing everybody a favor, and you're teaching young people about things like CIE. Sourcing keeps the kids in line.   Acroterion   (talk)   04:53, 16 February 2018 (UTC)