User talk:Gabortherman

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 16:00, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

March 2018
Hello, Gabortherman. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the article Superiorization, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Graham 87 05:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Help me!
Please help me with editing the entry on Supriorization. First I wish to know that I have really reached someone with this message, since I have never used talk before.

Gabortherman (talk) 18:06, 17 March 2018 (UTC)Gabor T. Herman


 * Hello Mr Herman, you have indeed reached someone. I'm not quite sure what kind of help you're looking for. I noticed several issues with the article that might be improved:
 * It's heavily based on your own work and that of your immediate co-authors. Surely there are other aspects of superiorization that are also worthy of being covered; for example, the bibliography you linked to lists some 76 papers about superiorization of which only 16 are authored or co-authored by you and 20 by Censor (with some overlap). Yet every single source cited in the article, whether it's a scholarly paper or an image processing program's website or the bibliography itself, originates with you, Censor or both. See also WP:SELFCITE.
 * As the maintenance tag says, organizing the content into sections would help.
 * If other Wikipedia articles mention (or should mention) superiorization, adding links to the superiorization article would help. See Help:Links for details on adding links.
 * I had the impression that the given references and the content of the article aren't all that closely connected. For example: "The superiorization methodology and perturbation resilience of algorithms are reviewed in[5][6][7], see also[8]." - What do those reviews actually say? I can't tell. Conversely, multiple paragraphs of the article don't cite any sources - where would I have to look to verify that content?
 * It would probably also be helpful to readers who haven't heard of superiorization before to add something on the general area of knowledge this belongs to. "In mathematics, the superiorization methodology is..." or maybe "In image processing"? "In numerical mathematics"?
 * I hope this helps. Huon (talk) 19:55, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

I need an explanation as to what is going with "Superiorization"
On March 17 Huon sent me the following criticism of the article:

"It's heavily based on your own work and that of your immediate co-authors. Surely there are other aspects of superiorization that are also worthy of being covered; for example, the bibliography you linked to lists some 76 papers about superiorization of which only 16 are authored or co-authored by you and 20 by Censor (with some overlap). Yet every single source cited in the article, whether it's a scholarly paper or an image processing program's website or the bibliography itself, originates with you, Censor or both. See also WP:SELFCITE"

In response to this, I added to the previous ten citations another eight; neither I nor Censor is an author of any of those new citations. After that I removed the COI message.

However, the COI message is now back. The history shows:

"19:39, 18 March 2018‎ Elmidae (talk | contribs)‎ . . (7,782 bytes) (-245)‎ . . (Undid revision 831101652 by Gabortherman (talk) COI not resolved. Lede ce) (undo | thank) (Tag: Undo)"

There may be an explanation for this somewhere, but I could not locate it. I would like the "Superiorization" entry not to be contaminated by a COI message, but having taken care of the previous objection, I do not know what it is that I am supposed to do. PLEASE EXPLAIN!

Help me!
Please help me with an explanation as to what is going with "Superiorization."

On March 17 Huon sent me the following criticism of the article:

"It's heavily based on your own work and that of your immediate co-authors. Surely there are other aspects of superiorization that are also worthy of being covered; for example, the bibliography you linked to lists some 76 papers about superiorization of which only 16 are authored or co-authored by you and 20 by Censor (with some overlap). Yet every single source cited in the article, whether it's a scholarly paper or an image processing program's website or the bibliography itself, originates with you, Censor or both. See also WP:SELFCITE"

In response to this, I added to the previous ten citations another eight; neither I nor Censor is an author of any of those new citations. After that I removed the COI message.

However, the COI message is now back. The history shows:

"19:39, 18 March 2018‎ Elmidae (talk | contribs)‎ . . (7,782 bytes) (-245)‎ . . (Undid revision 831101652 by Gabortherman (talk) COI not resolved. Lede ce) (undo | thank) (Tag: Undo)"

There may be an explanation for this somewhere, but I could not locate it. I would like the "Superiorization" entry not to be contaminated by a COI message, but having taken care of the previous objection, I do not know what it is that I am supposed to do. PLEASE EXPLAIN!

Gabortherman (talk) 00:06, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I would think or  would have more context. Perhaps you want to talk to them. I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @  03:24, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for notifying. My concerns are that the article is still very much a "sell-job", to the extent that is possible for a scientific methodology - extolling the virtues of the approach rather than critically assessing it. However, I admit that this may actually be a tonal issue rather than a COI one, and at least the additional references do spread the sourcing out a little, so I'm going to remove the tag. Cheers -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 05:44, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Gabortherman. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. ''Please don't edit your own article. This is highly discouraged as you are not an objective party. '' ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:54, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:25, 28 December 2018 (UTC)