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)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. 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)

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

A-spot
I have added a "" 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  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)

U-spot
I have added a "" 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  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)

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)

Colleague
Dear colleague please can you contact me at theater@com.ae ?? thank you

Precision on work of Maurice Allais
Hello Barraki, maybe it would be interesting to detail your contribution. 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)

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)


 * 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)

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)

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

Bluebird, The Blue Bird, etc
FYI, the Manual of Style specifically addresses disambiguation pages with a fairly formalized structure. Also, be aware that Disambiguation guides such pages, specifically indicating that they are not lists or indices of articles that only include the disambiguated term as part of their title. While I agree that it's reasonable to include a link in some form to The Blue Bird from bluebird (disambiguation), since some people may mistakenly search for "The Blue Bird" as one word and without the article the, some people are specifically looking for one of the artworks titled "The Blue Bird" and so type and may reasonably expect a result resctriced to that character sequence. For such people, I think that it would be fair to have a page for The Blue Bird. ENeville 23:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Laurent Beaudoin
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. Please remember to observe our core policies. -- Avi 20:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Please review wiki's policies on lead paragraphs, WP:NPOV, reliable sources, and verifiability. Firstly, http://tibetnetwork.org/ may or may not be a reliable source. Even if it were, discussion of Beaudoin's politics, and the politics of his company, may not belong in the article. Even if it does, it definitely does not belong in the article's lead. -- Avi 20:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Proposed speedy deletion of Boubaker polynomials
A tag has been placed on, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a. If you can indicate how Boubaker polynomials is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template hangon underneath the other template on the article, and also put a note on Talk:Boubaker polynomials saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please feel free to use deletion review, but do not continue to repost the article if it is deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions. David Eppstein (talk) 04:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, I went ahead and deleted this page because I couldn't find a deletion review discussion or any evidence that the new page was substantially different from the deleted version. However, since you participated in the AFD discussion for this article, but then actually edited the recreated article to improve it, it seems like you might have changed your mind about it or a new discussion might have taken place.  If this is so, let me know and we can work it out.--Danaman5 (talk) 05:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, the page is much better this time, now includes all the interresting informations for mathematicians, sourced, and at least includes equations writtent in LaTeX rather than ugly JPEG. The problem is still the same: the creator and major contributor of this page is Karem Boubaker himself, or at least claimed to be (as he said "please contact me at…"). In the french Wikipédia, we speedy deleted it because we think an universitary work is not relevant enough. I still think that, and cosmetic editions don't mean I'd vote keep. But if the article is deleted, sysops should also block some Boubaker's IP or protect some articles. . I won't do a second request for deletion by myself, but I keep being against autopromotion. Barraki 17:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Sir Barraki; Thank you a lot for HELP (editing and correcting the article), FAIR and HONESTY. Please excuse all precedent acts that could have bothered you. Thank you. for all.

I Know You Are Trying To Help
I know you are ttying to help and thanks. I think you do not really need to edit my user page as it is not an actual Encyclopedia page or article. There are a lot of articles that need "help" and work, articles that need your attention more than individual userpages. Thanks again. Master Redyva  ♠  2 Feb. 2008 (UTC) Of course you did it on "purpose". I have not added my name to the Category page that I listed (and directed) from my user page. Thanks again and have fun editing encyclodepia articles. Master Redyva  ♠  2 Feb. 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)