User talk:Danko Georgiev/Archive 1

Lazy editor (continued)
The discussion you started on my talk page now appears on the archives of my talk page. You requested there a comment on your competence in published mathematical work. You also suggested that the use of wikipedia pseudonyms by professional academic editors was cowardly and made some remarks about "pseudo-Ph.D.'s". I shall reply here.

Unlike you, I have never been banned from editing wikipedia articles. From wikipedia discussion pages it can be seen that you apparently reproduced somebody else's diagram in a recent article in Progress in Physics. You avoided stating that this diagram was not created wholly by you; later you justified yourself by making remarks about GFDL and minor modifications made by you. Isn't this plagiarism? Unruh's rebuttal of your article in Progress in Physics also accuses you of misrepresenting his views; he even suggests towards the end of his article that a key step in your mathematical argument is wrong, because you apparently did not appear to understand the role of complex inner product spaces in quantum mechanics. These published objections of Unruh seem correct to me and seem to question your mathematical competence.

Please try if possible to get over your irritation that people with genuine Ph.D.'s are participating in the wikipedia encyclopedia. (If you can't, why not get your favourite internet university to upgrade your MD to a Ph.D.?) Finally, although I post anomymously I am in fact also referred to in wikipedia mathematics articles under my real name. Unlike you, I am not responsable for my own name appearing and the scientific work referred to has no controversy attached to it. --Mathsci 06:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I have found another example of your incompetence at editing mathematical wikipedia articles. You have attempted to modify the article on Andrica's conjecture by copying and pasting most of what appears in the corresponding MathWorld article http://mathworld.wolfram.com/AndricasConjecture.html Whole sentence structures and diagrams have been lifted, which suggests that you have seriously infringed the copyright http://mathworld.wolfram.com/about/terms.html Did you obtain permission from Wolfram, Inc publicly to redistribute their material on wikipedia? The only originality in your editing seems to be your systematic misuse of the indefinite and definite articles in english.

MathWorld: A generalization of Andrica's conjecture considers the equation p_(n+1)^x-p_n^x=1 and solves for x. The smallest such x is  x approx 0.567148 (Sloane's A038458), known as the Smarandache constant, which occurs for p_n=113 and p_(n+1)=127 (Perez).

User: Danko Georgiev MD: Generalization of Andrica's conjecture considers the equation $$p_{n+1}^x-p_n^x=1$$ where $$p_n$$ is the nth prime number and solves for x. The smallest such x is $$x \approx 0.567148$$ (sequence A038458 in OEIS), known as the Smarandache constant, which occurs for $$p_n = 113$$ and $$p_{n + 1} = 127$$.


 * The MathWorld article does not correctly state Smarandache's generalisation of Andrica's conjecture which appears here http://www.gallup.unm.edu/~smarandache/conjprim.txt on Smarandache's web site at UNM-Gallup. Thus if $$x$$ is the Smarandache constant defined as the solution of $$127^x - 113^x=1$$, the conjecture states that $$p_{n+1}^y - p_{n}^y <1$$ if $$y<x$$. If you copy and paste without any understanding of the mathematics, it is hardly surprising that you did not realise that you were copying an error. Go and check the originals. Please also correct your addition to the wikipedia entry on Andrica's conjecture. Otherwise it should be removed because at present no generalisation of the conjecture is stated. It might also be an idea if you stopped editing wikipedia articles on mathematics if all you can do is reproduce this kind of meaningless error. --Mathsci 07:32, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * My reply is archived somewhere at Mathsci talk pages, archive 2. What Mathsci presents here is FLAWED conjecture, which is NOT generalized Andrica's conjecture. See detailed reply by me HERE! Danko Georgiev MD 08:03, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Editing discussion pages
No matter how much it irritates you, you are breaking the wikipedia rules when you edit other wikipedia editors' contributions from your talk page. I will report you if you continue to edit talk pages in this way. Please read the wikipedia rules if you are in any doubt. --Mathsci 21:55, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the warning! I will leave the curent talk page as is, I have moved some material to my user page :-)) Danko Georgiev MD 02:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I think you now seem to understand a little better what the purpose of your talk page is. Thank you for transferring part of the content (eg your credo and the material on chess) to your user page. --Mathsci 21:26, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I have moved the content to your talk page, I have not blanked the discussion. As you are violating numeorus Wikipedia policies, I think it is more appropriate to resolve the problem you have with my editing at your talk page. Danko Georgiev MD 01:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Mathematica plots
In regard your dispute with mathsci; I haven't investigated fully, but I question your inclusion of Mathematica plots which you generated in the article Andrica's conjecture. The footnote, with a link pointing from the article to your user page, is clearly improper, but I believe the plots may violate our WP:OR rules unless they were published in some "real" journal. My proof, in a Usenet post, of the classification theorem for all 3-dimensional algebras over the reals is likewise not usable as a source here. &mdash; Arthur Rubin | (talk) 14:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Dear Arthur, please note that there is no requirement for simple mathematical images to be published anywhere, and I give you example with 3 randomly chosen user-created images, which are almost 100% NOT published in journal.

Image:Mug_and_Torus_morph.gif Image:7_bridgesID.png Image:Cubicpoly.svg
 * In the article topology the following animation even is top rated for Wikipedia:
 * In the article Seven Bridges of Königsberg the images are certainly not published in journal, despite in some recreational mathbook one may find the text of the posed problems
 * And in Graph of a function the cubic plot is also user-created
 * So if you say that possibly some math textbook in the world has published exactly the graph of the mentioned cubic equation, then at 100% the Andrica's function is plotted in MathWorld and the graph is identical to mine. The code for the function is however created by me, so I am in the right to release it under any license I like, so everyone can copy - paste in Mathematica notebook, and then push "shift+enter" to produce the plot. Let us not be "greater saint than the Pope", I fully agree with you that no links to my user page are needed, I did this only as a reaction to User:Mathsci plagiarism charges. Please talk with him, I work professionally mathematics, and my name is in the list of authors in AMS, with Erdos number 4, which at least is some evidence that I am a little more than "self-proclaimed amateur" according to User:Mathsci. p.s. I have never believed in the academic degrees as relevant criterion to judge one's work, and my academic degrees are clearly indicated even in my user nickname, I am still PhD student, so I have not yet obtained this second degree. Danko Georgiev MD 02:12, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Question: if I release the same plots at PlanetMath will it be considered as OR? Concerning mathematics I have very deep suspicion that OR policy is abused. In discussions with User:Afshar I already expressed my views, which indeed reflect the Wikipedia policy as far as I can remember -- proof of theorem is in the public domain. The plot generation also follows some formal rules which can be checked by any user who understands basics of maths, so creation of simple plots, is also something that in view is in the public domain. The companies who created the plotting software have no copyright rights on the produced graphs with their software. Just thoughts ... Danko Georgiev MD 02:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Tabish Qureshi
Hello fellow editor. The reason I put the notability tag is so that we can discuss the notability of this person, no doubt an intelligent individual. The Wikipedia notability criteria for academics is outlined in Notability criteria for academics. Unfortunately, I don't see any independent sources that refer to him as an expert in the field. Despite the fact that he has consistently been published in numerous famous academic journals for the past 20 years, he is not automatically an expert. I have had several professors at university as well as colleagues of mine in industry that have been publishing for 40+ years in physics journals, but they don't have articles on Wikipedia, because they are not independently confirmed as "experts" by any respected source (perhaps by their colleagues or kids, but those are not "independent" sources). I will leave the tag on the page until you or another editor can provide some independent source that makes the case for this person's notability. By the way, I was born in India, so I hold no prejudice towards notable Indian scholars, even if they remain in India, as long as they meet any of the criteria outlined in Notability criteria for academics. Wikipedia brown 19:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your reply. I am not however sure that a paper can be found saying "Tabish Qureshi is expert". I have published twice comments on his works on some foundational problems, and I have commented positively what he has done, but then one has to establish whether I am notable ... :-) Well, let others decide the notability of the entry, I vote for keeping it. Danko Georgiev MD 00:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you could supply the year and place of birth for the subject of your biography if by chance they are known to you. --Mathsci 21:46, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Florentin Smarandache
Danko Georgiev, please stop attacking, insulting and threatening other users as you did on Talk:Florentin Smarandache ("extremely stupid", "brain effort :-))))", "you like to vandalise" etc.). As for "cowards", "identity games" etc.: Anonymous and pseudonymous editing has been an established and accepted practice on Wikipedia since its founding more than six years ago. If you want to change that, you will have to start elsewhere.

I can't see the basis for your accusation that User:Mathsci has a bias against Smarandache. Quite the other way around: You seem to have published several papers in Smarandache's journal Progress in Physics, so one has to assume that your career is not entirely independent of Smarandache's reputation and that you have a vital personal interest in presenting Smarandache in a positive light in this article. Please consider following the advice at Conflict_of_interest (1.). Thank you.

Regards, High on a tree 08:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Dear User, exactly because MathSci started insulting me with questions "am I ill, or in medication" I have used some of the words quoted by you, but NOT agaisnt Mathsci, I was talking about ME - "I am not idiot" .. etc, etc. Also it seems that user Mathsci himself has complained and continues to SPREAD FALSE INFORMATION!!! The speculation about Smarandache is ridiculuous - I do PhD in molecular pharmacology, and you can check that publishing or not in physical journal has nothing to do with my career, nor is vital for me. Also the fact I work in physics in my free time, all this is for fun, and I participate in heated discussions with various PhDs in physics, but this is NOT vital neither for me, nor for my research. I am tired to be accused by vandals in false things, and one of their huge curiosity is "why I am editing in physics"?? Obviously they think that I must have PhD in physics in order to edit such topics. My reply is - I edit whatever I like, and for example when I enrich the entries on Japanese culture with info and photos nobody asks me if I have PhD to do that. Mathsci reverts my edits on entry Smarandache, and he is the guy who has problems. I think it is not acceptable for spitting over the others in the main articles, and this is what the anonymous Mathsci does. If he had exposed his name, he wouldn't be so brave to spit over Smarandache. I do NOT question the practise for anonymous editing on all topics EXCEPT BIOGRAPHIES OF LIVING PEOPLE!!!!!!! One cannot spit anonymously over the biography of living person. If you can suggest where i have to post my proposal for changing the Wikipedia rules, I will appreciate that. My thesis is very concrete -- biographies of living people should be immunized for malicious editing from anonymous users. Kind regards, Danko Georgiev MD 10:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Sine gordon images
Greetings. You uploaded several animated gifs illustrating the Sine-Gordon equation: Image:Sine gordon 1.gif, Image:Sine gordon 2.gif, Image:Sine gordon 3.gif, Image:Sine gordon 4.gif, Image:Sine gordon 5.gif, Image:Sine gordon 6.gif, Image:Sine gordon 7.gif, Image:Sine gordon 8.gif, and Image:Sine gordon 9.gif.

User:Mathsci alleges that these images are derivative images of the images at this website. I have no idea whether these images were created from scratch by you, or whether you modified those original images to produce your images, as Mathsci alleges. (I don't understand the mathematical material, and I'm not familiar with the abilities of editors which can alter animated gifs.)

If you created these images on your own without altering someone else's work, then there is no problem. If you modified someone else's gifs with an image editor, then there could be a copyright problem. Mathsci has removed the images from the Sine-Gordon equation page, and I have listed these nine images at Possibly_unfree_images. If you could comment there about how the images were created, that could really help us sort this out. Thanks, – Quadell (talk) (random) 20:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Dear Quadell, please restore my sine-Gordon images released by ME personally, and now I have released them under GFDL, as they are exported from MAPLE by me personally! And they were published in http://cogprints.org/3894/ which is my own paper. By the way there are differences which I have commented with Miroshnichenko himself, conserning the kink and antikinks - on Miroshnichenko's site the ribbon model contains some errors. ALSO I HAVE PERSONALLY PROVIDED THE LINK TO MIROSHNICHENKO'S WEB SITE, so User:Mathsci had NOT discovered anything new that I have not posted! Concerning User:Mathsci he is vandal who has personal issues with me, so please warn him to stop this personal war. If you want I can forward you MAPLE worksheets from where the gifs were exported. Danko Georgiev MD 00:38, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Your comment at Talk:Xi-Ping Zhu
I saw that you felt that this article should be deleted. If matters to you, you should consider reading up at Articles for deletion about how you can nominate the article for deletion. Cheers. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 04:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Mathematical Incompetence
Please stop editing wikipedia articles beyond your expertise. On your own admission, you have a cynical utilitarian attitude to your current Ph.D. programme. But do not presume to have an expertise in subjects which are completely beyond your declared expertise in molecular pharmacology. This discipline is quite distant from advanced pure mathematics.You might wish to do this to increase your self-esteem, but your mathematical incompetence disqualifies you from editing any mathematical wikipedia pages. You have pretended to be an expert on Ricci flow: since you have had no formal mathematical training, could you kindly explain to us mathematicians why you have done this? Is it because you are an indefatigible TROLL? --Mathsci 19:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * My post at Talk:Xi-Ping Zhu:
 * I shall not use personal offences, although I wish to use such against the vandal Mathsci. First, I have not put the notability tag. Second, I have not pretended to have knowledge in Ricci flow. And last but not least, YES I DO STAND AGAINST UNETHICAL BAHAVIOR -- AN MY QUALIFICATIONS IN ETHICS, BIOMEDICAL ETHICS, AND ETHICS IN SCIENCE ARE AT LEAST MASTER DEGREE, FOR WHICH MATHSCI OBVIOUSLY HAVE NO QUALIFICATION AT ALL. Also Mathsci not only lacks knowledge of basic ethical issues, he is exactly on the contrary highly unmoral individual who lead personal war against me against all Wikipedia rules. And YES MISTER *PRO* -- HAVING PH.D. IN MATHEMATICS DOES NOT GIVE YOU RIGHT TO MISBEHAVE YOURSELF. I am greatly disgusted by your non-sense posts. I am talking about ethical issues, not about the Ricci flow. p.s. The person who has inserted the notability tag can put it again -- I will support this against Mathsci reverts. Danko Georgiev MD 02:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You based your comments on a personal uninformed reading of a mathematical paper. This paper was in fact superseded by another paper on the arxiv in December 2006. (A Fields Medallist friend gave me a copy of the article as bedtime reading last Christmas). How can you boast about your superior scientific ethics in these circumstances? Apparently you are still making extremely serious accusations of criminality against Zhu: why then have you seen fit to disregard this very important document?  Is this a value judgement you have made or is it simply your ignorance of the existence of the revised article?  At best this seems ill-judged  and ill-informed. Please stop editing wikipedia articles related to pure mathematics. --Mathsci 07:58, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Unruh's interferometer
Hello Danko Georgiev. The article on Unruh's interferometer that you created in April is being discussed at the Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. You are welcome to add your comments there. EdJohnston 16:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Invite


Gregbard 07:11, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy on anonymity
(was posted in full, removing as inflammatory --Random832 21:45, 15 July 2007 (UTC))

Mathsci 19:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Comment This warning has nothing to do with what occurred and is inappropriate and possibly inflammatory. I suggest, Mathsci, that you remove it. KP Botany 20:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

No pesonal information has been posted anywhere by this user. KP Botany 20:10, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You were warned about this.

Wikipedia operates on the principle that every contributor has a right if they wish to remain completely anonymous. Wikipedia policy on that issue is strictly enforced. Posting private information about a user with the intent to annoy, threaten or harass, specifically their (alleged) name and/or personal details, is strictly prohibited as harassment, and users who do that are often immediately blocked from editing Wikipedia. Such posting can cause offense or embarrassment to the victim of the posting, not least because it means that their name, and any personal criticism or allegations made against them can then appear on web searches.

If you have posted such information, please remove it immediately. Please then follow the link to this page and follow the instructions there, including emailing [mailto:oversight-l@lists.wikimedia.org this address]. It will then be removed from the archives of Wikipedia.

If you do not ensure that the personal information you posted is removed from this site you will be blocked from editing this site. Remember: Wikipedia's privacy policy is there to protect the privacy of every user, including you. in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 15:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure it's completely on the level for Jpgordon to review his own blocks, but in this case it's obviously the right decision. Just thought I'd endorse it to keep things on the up and up. Wily D  15:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

OK. I'm assuming good faith and unprotecting this page so you can tell the world what you told me in email about your intentions. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 00:50, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Dear Jpgordon, I think that my previous appeal was written under the influence of User:Mathsci unethical posts of Bulgarian flag with text "Bulgarian mafia" as well as his personal offences. Now I clearly realize that without rules a site like Wikipedia cannot be controlled by the admins. I would like to request for my ban to be canceled. If my request is accepted I shall not enter into any form of arguing on wikipedia talk pages, and shall not violate the wiki policies. The situation with User:Mathsci run out of control for fault of both sides, however now I think I could have been wiser and refrain from continuing the dispute with him. Regards, Danko Georgiev MD 04:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)


 * OK. I've not looked at all into Mathsci's actions; someone else will be doing that. You can argue on talk pages -- argue about improving the articles, that is, not about the topics of the articles. You'll understand: Talk:Mathematics is about discussing Mathematics, not discussing Mathematics. We try pretty hard to keep Wikipedia talk pages from becoming general forums; "we're here to write an encyclopedia" is close to a religion here. Anyway, if you think you can stick by our rules, I'll let you back -- you were pretty badly provoked. Your block has been lifted; but you committed one of the more grievous sins around here (violating another editor's anonymity), so you'll be pretty closely watched. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 04:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Usually I am not curious about the identity of others, everybody should be free to decide how to contribute. Now I think it is wiser just not to reply to provocations, otherwise the resulting scenes are not pleasant for anyone. Regards, Danko Georgiev MD 05:50, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

File:Ddd-pic008.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ddd-pic008.gif, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Skier Dude ( talk ) 06:50, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Ddd-pic005.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ddd-pic005.gif, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Skier Dude ( talk ) 06:50, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Ddd-pic003.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ddd-pic003.gif, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Skier Dude ( talk ) 06:50, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Ddd-pic002.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ddd-pic002.gif, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Skier Dude ( talk ) 06:50, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Ddd-pic001.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ddd-pic001.gif, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Skier Dude ( talk ) 06:50, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:TI-problem.svg
Thanks for uploading File:TI-problem.svg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like PD-self (to release all rights), (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 11:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:TI-problem.PNG
Thanks for uploading File:TI-problem.PNG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like PD-self (to release all rights), (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 11:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

email
Danko, The best email address to use is: pilgrim@blueyonder.co.uk

I will edit the bit about Ca2+ on the quantum-mind site.

I have had a thought that you might just consider for the medium term. That is that I should put together a popular or semi-popular book discussing your version of consciousness. The attraction of Orch-Or, whatever its faults, was that it told a plausibly reasoned story right through from the need to look to the quantum level, to implementation in microtubules, to the output of unified consciousness. You're probably not getting that sort of exposure at the moment. No doubt you'd be better to team up with a scientifically trained writer, but they might be difficult to find given the present climate of hostility towards quantum consciousness theory. The main problem as usual with books is finding a publisher. Perhaps you have a university press that would consider it, or one could approach John Benjamins, as they published both Jibu & Yasue and Vitiello.

Incidentally, my user name was meant to be my password, but got mixed up. It refers to a science fiction novel, Persephone Wakes, I once wrote about a conscious android that used a rather Hameroffian technology. It didn't function very well as an android. I hope it's not a disappointment that I'm neither a Greek goddess nor a female adolescent. - Simon Raggett Persephone19 (talk) 16:13, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Unruh-1.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Unruh-1.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:44, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Unruh-2.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Unruh-2.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Unruh-3.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Unruh-3.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:36, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Unruh-4.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Unruh-4.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:37, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Unruh-5.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Unruh-5.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:50, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Unruh-6.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Unruh-6.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:55, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

SNARE
Hello Dr. Georgiev,

my name is Martin Juha and I´m a PhD-Student from Germany. I would like to ask, if you are the author of the picture:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Exocytosis-machinery.jpg

If you are, I would like to ask you in which publication it was used. I would like to cite it, if its ok with you. Thank you for your reply.

Sincerely, --Docsj (talk) 14:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Commons:File:Ceca_turbo-folk2.jpg at Commons
Gday, the file has previously been moved to Commons, and recently it has been labelled for deletion due to not being in the public domain. You may wish to address that matter. billinghurst  sDrewth  13:35, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:China brain.png
Thank you for uploading File:China brain.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is [ a list of your uploads].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. ww2censor (talk) 05:12, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

What Wikipedia is not
Please take note that WP:NOTTVGUIDE, as part of wp:NOT, is a core content policy. The deletion of such content is quite proper. If you want to change that policy, I'd suggest wp:VPP would be the place to discuss it, but I urge you not to ignore it. As it stands, you are on the wrong side of the policy. LeadSongDog come howl!  16:36, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Q-tunnel.PNG listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Q-tunnel.PNG, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:17, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited W. G. Unruh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Relativity (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:26, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

File:Andrica conjecture1.PNG listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Andrica conjecture1.PNG, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 20:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Andrica conjecture2.PNG listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Andrica conjecture2.PNG, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 21:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

File:Andrica conjecture3.PNG listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Andrica conjecture3.PNG, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 21:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Stefan Marinov photo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Stefan Marinov photo.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:12, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Danko Georgiev, you are invited!
Maybe you can include some information on Bulgarian universities? I have invted you, because one of the purposes of this new project is to share information about the universities in Southeast Europe.--Comparativist1 (talk) 16:18, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Impact factors
Hi, thanks for updating many IFs. One request: sometimes IFs are also in the body of the title, not just the infobox. Could you perhaps update those, too, as well as any possible references? Thanks! --Guillaume2303 (talk) 14:57, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Another detail: "see also" sections should come just before a "references" section, see WP:MOS. Happy editing! --Guillaume2303 (talk) 17:19, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the "see also" position information. I am not sure that I will be able to edit the content of the journals, some have stubs with only IF info. I wanted to update the infoboxes only, with here and there fixes that catch my attention. Danko Georgiev (talk) 17:23, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * All you need do is look down to the body of text and if there is IF info, update the IF and change the dates in the reference... :-) Otherwise, we get the weird situation that we will have two different IFs in the infobox and text (remember that an infobox is supposed to summarize the text and should agree with what is written). --Guillaume2303 (talk) 17:34, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be a bother, but removing a completely good independent reference (which only needed updating of the dates), as you did at World Psychiatry (journal), or replacing them with a source that is not independent, as you did at Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica is even worse than not updating at all... --Guillaume2303 (talk) 18:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the correction. I thought that "free source" is better than "paid source" (JCR is not open access). Also, I consider myself "retired editor" on Wikipedia. I was editing from the viewpoint of a reader of Wikipedia, not as a editor. Encyclopedia is for readers, and as a reader I can tell you several things: first, the infobox from a reader's perspective is all that is needed for a journal, and almost no reader will ever read the text to search for ISSN, IF, journal webpage, etc. You go to to the infobox and you need the information to be there. That is why I did not want to update the text in the first place; second, some of these journal articles were stubs, and they are completely useless if someone needs detailed encyclopedic article on the subject, so I cannot make them worse. But in my opinion >90% of readers will come to check the journal infobox for ISSN, IF, link to journal webpage etc. Why people will do that? Because Wikipedia articles come on top of Google searches, and journal homepages for most journals do not appear at all in the results. Instead you have to start browsing from the journal A-Z lists in the main publishers. Third, exactly because of such categorizations by "concerned editors" that my edits are worse than no edits at all, I quit editing. You are free to revert my bad edits, I will edit no more. I can only suggest when you comment/help the next editor in Wikipedia (in most cases it will be also anonymous guy) provide your information in a friendly manner without trying to characterize the work of the person. Regards, Danko Georgiev (talk) 02:14, 28 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Danko, I'm sorry you feel like this. You're probably right that some people will not look any further than the infobox, but certainly not everybody will do this and others may find it strange to find (seemingly) contradictory information in the body of the text. Also, in the past, several journal articles have been challenged and editors have proposed them for deletion because of a lack of independent sources. So over the course of the past few years, I have patiently added independent references to several thousand articles on academic journals. The sources you added have indeed the advantage of being free, but they also can very easily be found by anybody clicking through to the journal's homepage. Now how would you feel if you had put in all this effort and somebody came by and blithely started deleting all that? As an aside, I just Googled 5 different journals and each time the publisher's page for that journal came out on top, so the problem with WP articles coming up first is perhaps less than you think. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 08:58, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Acceptance of Orch-OR
Hey Danko. Recently, the IP 24.192.195.236 (talk) has been making extremely forceful assertions that Orch-OR is much more viable and much more widely accepted than the article states. He's currently arguing this in Talk:Orchestrated_objective_reduction. Would you mind weighing in? —wing gundam  02:55, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Afshar inverted4.gif or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 11:33, 12 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Another one of your uploads, File:Apodization2.png, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:06, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Apodization2.png missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as: is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
 * File:Apodization2.png

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 04:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Danko D Georgiev.JPG listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Danko D Georgiev.JPG, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. ATTENTION : This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

August 2018
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Yoshiaki Ozawa a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Requests for history merge. Thank you. Polyamorph (talk) 21:01, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello, why did you revert my edits? Currently, the page is called "Ozawa Yoshiaki" but the article talks about "Yoshiaki Ozawa". Yes, in Japanese they start with the Family name, then put the First name. And, fantastically, the correct page name "Yoshiaki Ozawa" redirects to "Ozawa Yoshiaki". You also destroyed my edits on the page after I correctly interchanged the article names and the redicrects. As I do not want to enter into revert mode with you, please do repair or move the pages as I corrected them by whatever mechanism that satisfies the policies that you are talking about. Basically, if you are so knowledgeable on the move policies, just do what I did in the "right" way, and give me the chance to redo my edits on top of the move. Otherwise, I will just stop editing Wikipedia for another 5 years. Danko Georgiev (talk) 21:24, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Now, let me add 2 more things. First, the Move button is hidden and I had to waste a lot of time to figure out that this will pop out after I click "More". Second, the "Move" does not work, because already some idiot has created the page Yoshiaki Ozawa and made it redirect to Ozawa Yoshiaki. And Wikipedia now does not allow me to complete to move but request to ask an administrator. Just, amazing ???? Danko Georgiev (talk) 21:40, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello, you can request a page move here: Requested moves. It is vital for our project that edits are attributed to their original author, we cannot allow the edit history to be lost. As such cut/paste moves are forbidden. I am not an admin so cannot make the move myself, please use Requested moves instead. Polyamorph (talk) 10:57, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Re:Template M for measures
Hi Danko,
 * thanks for writing me about it:Template:M. I'm glad to see it is considered useful on en.wiki as well. I created the template a long time ago, and the syntax has really changed in the meantime. I'm afraid that I'm not able to recreate it here... I guess it would be wise to ask about it on a proper Wikiproject (is there an active Wikiproject Physics, for example?), so that other users can give their opinion and maybe somebody can put forward their own candidacy for adapting the template to en.wiki's customs :-)


 * Thanks,

--Fabio Bettani (talk) 20:56, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Dear Fabio, I am not knowledgeable about creating templates in Wikipedia. For now, I have found a manual way to do what your template does, e.g. 1 pm. Danko Georgiev (talk) 21:40, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

File:Ddd-pic006.gif listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ddd-pic006.gif, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Ddd-pic007.gif


The file File:Ddd-pic007.gif has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious encyclopedic use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Ddd-pic004.gif


The file File:Ddd-pic004.gif has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Also:
 * File:Ddd-pic010.gif

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Ddd-pic011.gif


The file File:Ddd-pic011.gif has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Ddd-pic009.gif


The file File:Ddd-pic009.gif has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Maria Teresa Bassa Poropat


The article Maria Teresa Bassa Poropat has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Usedtobecool ✉ ✨ 16:03, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank for the notice. I have added several references including official administrative pages with dates. Danko Georgiev (talk) 17:58, 13 August 2019 (UTC)