User talk:Georgehaller

Lagrangian coherent structure
The title of this article is currently "Lagrangian coherent structure", in accordance with Wikipedia's Manual of Style, which decrees that the titles of articles about things should use the singular form. For example: Bird, not Birds, Tensor, not Tensors. Putting abbreviations in parentheses at the end of the title is also a no-no: the correct way to do this is to put an entry in at the LCS disambiguation page. You can read more at Article titles. -- The Anome (talk) 18:45, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 15 June
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:34, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Lagrangian coherent structure page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=667089578 your edit] caused an empty citation error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F667089578%7CLagrangian coherent structure%5D%5D Ask for help])

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
Dear Georgehaller,

it appears that there exists a large conflict of interest in your editing of Lagrangian coherent structure, which I discuss on the article talk page. I urge you to read Wikipedia’s policy on conflicts of interest and refrain from referring to your own work and publications in that article in particular and in Wikipedia in general. Do not hesitate to discuss this issue, here on this talk page of directly on the article talk page. Thank you very much. Ariadacapo (talk) 18:03, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Dear Ariadacapo,

Thanks for your note. This Wikipedia page summarizes all mathematical developments in the detection of Lagrangian coherent structures. As any scientific review, it refers the reader to the relevant articles for more detail. Several of these articles happen to involve me as author or co-author, as you point out. This would be hard to avoid, given that I initiated this field, including coining its  name. I have read Wikipedia’s policy on conflicts of interest and could not find an issue with including references to my own papers as well. Perhaps you could be more specific on why you believe that a review of a field should selectively omit references to certain authors. Georgehaller (talk)


 * The issue is that the citations in this article are overwhelmingly pointing to the work of one person and simultaneously that this same person is the main contributor to the article (the other main contributors to that article are either your co-author or anonymous IPs from the Federal Institute of Technology Zurich). If you have initiated this field, and coined its name, then this puts you in a delicate position with regards to this article. This conflict of interest should not prevent you from contributing to it, but you should be especially cautious: citing oneself carries the risk of losing neutral point of view. Citing exclusively one author carries the risk of giving undue weight. See WP:SELFCITE and WP:SELFPUB.
 * There are other smaller issues with the article (like jargon and a couple of copyvio illustrations) but they will be sorted progressively. The main problem is that the authors of the article are also the authors of the article references. Please stop making major contributions to this article now. I am sure there are plenty of other topics where you can make great contributions without running into conflict of interest. Thank you. Ariadacapo (talk) 11:06, 16 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the explanation. Please note that (1) I did not create this page (2) For years, it remained a one-paragraph page with an imprecise definition to which people (except me) were adding their papers randomly (3) The page was flagged by Wikipedia as one that needs the attention of an expert. I took it upon myself to help out, without removing any of the original references. As you know, anyone at any time can correct any perceived bias on this page. This is a process that takes time and people who care to contribute. Until then, one has to choose between having material written by one person or having no material at all (the earlier Wikipedia flag signaled a preference for the first option).  What I have written is largely based on an  invited Annual Reviews of Fluid Mechanics article--which was also reviewed by a  panel of independent experts.
 * In any case, you've made your point and I've made mine. I hope for more contributions from a more diverse circle of authors.
 * OK. Please see WP:EXPERT, especially points 2 and 6 of the advice section. Ariadacapo (talk) 16:01, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Article nominated for deletion
Dear Georgehaller, this is just a notification that I have just nominated Lagrangian coherent structure for deletion at Articles for deletion/Lagrangian coherent structure. Thank you. Ariadacapo (talk) 10:28, 11 March 2023 (UTC)


 * I thought this was settled 7 years ago, ending with an apology from you. What has changed? Georgehaller (talk) 11:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Lagrangian coherent structure for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lagrangian coherent structure, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Lagrangian coherent structure until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 12 March 2023 (UTC)