Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matrix and tensor objects for numerical simulations


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 21:30, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Matrix and tensor objects for numerical simulations

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Completely fails WP:NOTTEXTBOOK, appears to be a tutorial/course rather than an encyclopedic article. Chaotıċ Enby  (talk · contribs) 18:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Mathematics.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  18:50, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Chill please! I do not think we need harsh words (by anyone) so I will strongly suggest toning down this discussion. It should be clear that a good scientist (Fritzudo) is also new to Wikipedia, and has written an article which while interesting, is not what Wikipedia is about. He is probably also not aware that many (perhaps most) of the comments on this page have come from senior scientists and/or emeriti, some of whom have sought privacy. However, if one were to look carefully into their contributions it should rapidly become clear that they are almost all very experienced. N.B., I am deliberately placing this at the top in the hope of toning down this discussion. Ldm1954 (talk) 01:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * N.B., as I was writing this @Fritzudo has been blocked by an admin. Ldm1954 (talk) 01:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTTEXTBOOK and not-so-subtle WP:COI given the username of the article creator and the references cited. This does not have the tone and scope of an encyclopedia article. -- Kinu t/c 18:58, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. When I first looked at the article, it seemed like it could remain with thorough cleanup, but after looking at it and the prose more closely, it seems like it's purely a manual on how to use a calculator and it doesn't have any encyclopedic information; it definitely fails WP:NOTTEXTBOOK. As a result, it contradicts the purpose of Wikipedia. That Tired Tarantula   Burrow  19:20, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Dear members of the discussion,
 * many thanks for your comments. I finished my article by now, and I regarded your advice in the revised version to avoid the impression of writing a manual.
 * This article is definitely not a manual or tutorial because it is the result of thorough research in the field of Informatics (Computer Science) and Numerical Methods.
 * Probably you know that the fields of object-oriented Analysis, Modeling and Software Design in computer science and software technology is of great success since a couple of decades, especially dominating the internet technology and cell phone applications worldwide.
 * The impression of "That Tired Tarantula" about the use of calculators is quite typical for that technology: you call a function, put data in, and get data results out -> easy and quickly finished! The great advantage of object-oriented software for users is this type of user-friendly interface - it makes processes easy to handle !
 * This means in case of the article, that rather complex operations of traditional matrix operations in symbolic notation are "simplified" by this very new user interface of object-oriented formulation presented in my scientific contribution. This supports also a better understanding and handling of linear algebra by the index based notation of tensor and matrix objects as presented.
 * But for a better understanding of the presented new approach, the reader needs some basic knowledge about object-oriented modelling and programming, which you may reach by studies of the relevant literature recommended. The simple "calculator image" is achieved by use of the definition of my new classes MATRIX, VEKTOR, tensor BASIS etc. (traditionally recalled as data types), and the generation of class instances (variables), as well as the associated member functions (procedures) which are bound to the class objects (instances). The object-oriented paradigm comes along with the principles of encapsulation and inheritance, as well as public and private member functions, in order to ensure the safety of software code. This reads easy as a "calculator", but it is not common knowledge and needs the scientific intelligence of the WK encyclopedia !
 * My article presents a solid theory about linear algebra and data management of index-based mathematical objects distributed in relevant chapters, a prototyping of the object-oriented solutions in clearly represented typical program examples ("snippet"), and numerical results as proof of effectiveness and accuracy.
 * It includes an innovative formulation and implementation of object-oriented algorithms concerning
 * - matrix and tensor objects for object-oriented numerical methods and programming,
 * - a new matrix arithmetic by overloading of the standard arithmetic and functional operators by use of C++,
 * - an index-based algebra for multidimensional matrices with a generalized matrix multiplication allowing the commutativity of matrix operands.
 * Its use allows the whole variety of matrix operations in a new and easy manner, and to establish consistent transformations of skew-angled tensors of higher order in three-dimensional Euclidian space.
 * I hope for a better understanding of the matter and would prefer your timely withdrawal of the deletion proposals.
 * With best regard Fritzudo (talk) 14:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, Original research is not allowed to be published on Wikipedia. Thank you. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 15:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Respectfully, your comments indicate precisely why this is not an appropriate article. This is original research written like a journal article. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, e.g., it is not arXiv. -- Kinu t/c 17:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Nonsense! Fritzudo (talk) 17:27, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Please familiarize yourself with What Wikipedia is not before writing articles here. Also, replying Nonsense! isn't the best way to get your point across. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 17:31, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I am sorry - but you are to look at the references before opposing!
 * This is published knowledge by Springer 2022 and research ended a decade ago! Fritzudo (talk) 18:08, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I am sorry - but you are to look at the references before opposing! Fritzudo (talk) 18:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * At the moment, the references consist of your own book, a link to download files on your website, a citation to a book on C++, and a link to Wikipedia's article about the Levi-Civita symbol that is misrepresented as a citation to your own work. I have tried to be dispassionate in my comments, but given your flippant response of Nonsense! and your apparent failure to understand Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, I see zero point in continuing this conversation. Kinu t/<i style="color:red">c</i> 18:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * +10 points: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi-Civita_symbol#Tensor_Calculus[7] Fritzudo (talk) 13:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * As Chaotic Enby and Kinu have said, Wikipedia is not a place to publish original theories. As a matter of fact, content is only allowed to remain if it has independent and reliable sources (and if those sources can be cited). Wikipedia articles in the mainspace are not intended to be anything other than encyclopedia entries. Wikipedia has well-defined guidelines on what is and what is not allowed and what format content will be permitted in, so please look at them. Articles should also not be used as a means of promotion of any kind. Furthermore, please do not edit about anything that may cause you to have a conflict of interest; please do not use yourself as a source. And please make sure to respect the viewpoints of other editors even if you don't agree with them, since learning more about other editors' viewpoints can help you learn more about editing. That Tired Tarantula   Burrow  18:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * You are quite wrong! Object-oriented modelling is not an original theory! It is state of the arts in science and technology since about 40 years. It is abstruse to qualify internationally validated knowledge from science and technology as not reliable and independent sources. I miss your interest in key findings of computer science and mathematical methods in the field of numerical simulations of real world problems like Finite Element Models in Engineering and Fluid Mechanics.     Fritzudo (talk) 16:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * First of all, there's already an article about that. Second of all, your article is written like a manual and doesn't present new encyclopedic information, so it is not an encyclopedic entry, so it cannot remain on Wikipedia. That Tired Tarantula   Burrow  16:59, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * You have no cogent arguments: That article is about oo programming and NOT about numerical models! My article is NOT a manual, but follows a stringent explanation of the scientific context! Fritzudo (talk) 18:24, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * We better finish that fault-finding debate now! Fritzudo (talk) 18:30, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * At this point, I don't see any further benefit in replying to the author's comments. Given that they are repeating the same arguments over and over again and bordering on an incivil tone in some of their statements (and also inappropriately blanking the discussion about the other article they created), it is likely best just to let the process take its course. <strong style="color:blue">Kinu <i style="color: red">t</i>/<i style="color:red">c</i> 18:36, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * There happened no blanking the discussion about any article! I just wonder about the ignorance of scientific contexts.     Fritzudo (talk) 18:50, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, there was blanking of a discussion. The link given above points directly to it. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 16:45, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. Note that there is an article Matrix/Tensor Algorithms which I nominated for deletion without being aware of this one. Both are clearly not appropriate for Wikipedia. (They are not wrong, just definitely not appropriate.) Ldm1954 (talk) 19:33, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: the conceptual material here is already covered in other WP articles on linear algebra and the both the title & specific content here violates WP:NOTTEXTBOOK. — MarkH21talk 20:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi MarkH_21, this is a non-proven statement ! Please, deliver the reference to your mentioned articles about linear algebra for multidimensional tensors and matrices referring, object-oriented classes for arithmetic operations. We are excited about your knowledge.  Fritzudo (talk) 12:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Reads like a tutorial, please read WP:NOTTEXTBOOK before creating such articles. Killarnee (talk) 16:55, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi Killarnee, MarkH_21, Chaotic and Ldm1954,
 * I studied WP:NOTTEXTBOOK already and realized that my article is not to classify as a textbook nor a manual or tutorial ! It presents a stringent structure about relevant mathematics and informatics knowledge, prototyping of classes with typical member functions and proofs for the effectiveness and accuracy of matrix algorithms.
 * It's a summary of accepted knowledge in the field of Numerical Mathematics and Computer Science with topics of Object-Oriented Modeling, linear Matrix and Tensor Algebra in index notation and related Matrix Calculus for multidimensional matrices and tensors. The extensive literature about these fields in science and engineering is summarized in the cited references.
 * I anticipate your proposals for further improvements in terms of content, and do expect your withdrawal of the deletion statement, next !  Fritzudo (talk) 13:11, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Your article is telling readers how to do something; therefore, it is a how-to guide and not an encyclopedia article. It doesn't matter whether or not something is accepted if it is presented in a way that is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. And as XOR'easter said, articles remain based off their content and how it is conveyed, not on credentials. And yes, there is already an article about Object-oriented modeling (sorry, I mentioned the wrong article earlier). You can expand with content that is not presented as step-by-step instructions, that does not use yourself as a source, and that is neutral. And please do not demand for editors to "withdraw" opposing votes; take the time to understand why they've voted in the ways they have instead, since doing so is more civil and helps with creating better articles. Anyways, I will not be discussing this more. That Tired Tarantula   Burrow  17:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete This page is trying to be some combination of math textbook, software manual, and code repository, none of which is what Wikipedia is. Moreover, it's full of WP:COI/WP:PROMO issues. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 14:26, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * It's not "some combination", but a systematic integration of scientific theories and methods of accepted knowledge ! For a better understanding of your rating, I would like to be informed about your professional competence in these fields. Because you seem to be misunderstanding: the article is NOT just some conglomeration of everything! Sorry, but there is nothing about to find on your personal user page.   Fritzudo (talk) 15:28, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia does not operate based on credentials. Demanding that another editor provide their professional bona fides is likely to be seen as a personal attack. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 16:47, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, that you feel attacked and refuse to tell about your professional competence in science, please tell me, whether you ever had some experience with matrix and tensor calculus, and practiced matrix operations, like a multiplication of A * B or similar. In case you never did, it is probably not possible to understand the signification of the article at all. Your valuation "This page is trying to be some combination of ..." may disclose such deficits, and I won't accept it.                Fritzudo (talk) 18:04, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * It's not a question of competence, you don't need to be an expert in linear algebra to see that this is a how-to manual and not an encyclopedia article. Please stop accusing others of incompetence if they disagree with you. Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 18:42, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Dear Chaotic, I am very sorry about the prejudice of all your statements. Of course, a certain amount of competence is needed for judging about complicated scientific matters and interrelationships! Now you are blaming yourself, that you have written all your delete statements from the very beginning without any knowledge about the content of the article. The arrogation of yours is unacceptable and is counterproductive for any open discussion in WP! Therefore, I will inform the supervision of WP about your inappropriate mode of behavior in this deletion discussion.   Fritzudo (talk) 21:51, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * What kind of supervision are we talking about? X-ray vision, telescopic vision, or maybe even laser eyes? Chaotıċ Enby   (talk · contribs) 23:24, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
 * We don't need this here. Blocked per WP:BATTLEGROUND and WP:NPA. <strong style="color:blue">Kinu <i style="color: red">t</i>/<i style="color:red">c</i> 01:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.