User talk:Kreykh

Image license
I have a question about the image you posted, File:Intellectual Products Resulting Table by prof Brandin.jpg. You have said (here) that you are not Dr. Brandin, and yet at the page for this image and for File:Intellectual Proces by prof Brandin.jpg you placed a Creative Commons tag and said "I created this work by myself." If you are not Dr. Brandin, however, those tables and figures are not your work, they are copyrighted, and you would not have permission to post them here, unless you obtained explicit permission from Dr. Brandin (through e-mail, which you would have to forward to Wikipedia's OTRS team). Please respond as soon as possible, either here or at my talk page. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 16:06, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The question is, are those tables and figures scans from Dr. Brandin's book? If they are from his book, it doesn't matter whether they were published electronically or in paper form; you need to get an e-mail from Dr. Brandin specifically saying "I release these figures (name the figures here) under the Creative Commons attribution license (or a comparable license) for use on Wikipedia."  Then you need to forward that e-mail, along with links to the two images on Wikipedia, to permissions@en-wikipedia.org.
 * As for the comprehensibility of the article...trust me, I have more than a high school education. I am a researcher in neuroscience and have taken several university-level classes in calculus and other math areas, and still could not understand this article.  The problem isn't my education level, the problem is that it doesn't provide any context as to what the article is about.  If you were writing this for a journal article it would be acceptable to assume that your readers share the same background and jargon as you do, but that doesn't work on Wikipedia because most readers aren't aware of the context surrounding this article.  I don't know what "intellectual power" or "Intellectual Product by Intelligent Systems" refers to in your field, and I would venture to guess 99% of Wikipedia users don't know either.
 * As for referencing something new and unique....please read Wikipedia's guidelines on notability, available at Notability. "new" theories and research must meet a certain standard...you must be able to show that they have received notable coverage from third parties (ie, not just coverage in Dr. Brandin's own book) and have a real influence in the world.  Do you have any resources to show this? r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 17:06, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, to be honest, Wikipedia is not a place to advertise or to promote ideas; it is a place for covering information ideas that have already been accepted (ie, it is a tertiary source); that is why we have the notability guidelines.
 * As for the cleanup tag at the top of the article; that shouldn't be removed unless those issues are addressed. In general, it's best to let another wikipedia editor come along and review the article, and let them be responsible for removing it.  Moving the page won't cause the header to remove; the only way for the header to go away is for people editing the article to address the concerns listed in the header. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 17:39, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Isues with Copyrighted material has been Addressed. Brainstorming ideas for improving th epage such as includsion of the proper refferences of the method  to th erelated articles, disussing with with otehr authors of teh related articles, such as Intellect and Inteligence.--Kreykh (talk) 22:30, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I am not planning on deleting the article, I was merely pointing out things that needed to be improved.
 * By the way, regarding your contact with the "owner" of the Intelligence article...just for clarification: nobody "owns" articles on Wikipedia, people just edit the articles. Someone who edits an article a light might be a "major contributor" to that article, but is not the "owner"; all articles on Wikipedia are free to the community.  (That is the reason why we can't accept copyrighted images and text&mdash;because those images are owned by someone, and Wikipedia articles are owned by no one.) See WP:OWN for more information. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 22:40, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Nomination of Measurement (intellect) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Measurement (intellect) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Measurement (intellect) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

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 template from the top of the article. CharlieEchoTango 01:18, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Formula of Measuring Intellect by Prof V Brandin 2 27 2009.jpg


The file File:Formula of Measuring Intellect by Prof V Brandin 2 27 2009.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Uploaded for Measurement (intellect). No other 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. --Minorax &laquo;&brvbar;talk&brvbar;&raquo; 04:37, 8 February 2023 (UTC)