Compactembedding

Welcome!

Hello, Compactembedding, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Peter Hästö, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Starting an article
• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ➜GƒoleyFour (GSV) 01:16, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Peter Hästö

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Peter Hästö requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. ➜GƒoleyFour (GSV) 01:16, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you.  Racconish ^Tk 07:50, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

You are suspected of sockpuppetry, which means that someone suspects you of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes. Please make yourself familiar with the notes for the suspect, then respond to the evidence at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Compactembedding. Thank you..   Racconish ^Tk 19:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi! Yeah! You can do what you want. What I concern is the content, whether it comes from verified sources. I posted a comment on this issue to respond you somewhere, but I forgot. What I said is that you can delete my article as soon as you LIKE. As a researcher, I provided over enough what I wrote, but you deleted and then have suspected. Any way, thank you for helping me verify what I read about Wiki on BBC. That was enough. Thanks.

Hi GƒoleyFour! Thank you for warning "not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself". I should not have done this. Since when I edited the article and thought it was ok, I deleted that template. But that was against your policy. I do apologize for doing that. But I have suggested someone to delete my article. Therefore, there will not be anything like that now and then. Thanks.

Proposed deletion of Peter Hästö

The article Peter Hästö has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:PROF notability criteria not met

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.   Racconish ^Tk 06:41, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Compactembedding: I wanted to introduce the new topic function spaces with variable exponents and a key contributors. But I was insulted by Racconish of Wiki by claiming that I am involving "prohibited purposes". I was patient to edit this paper according to their comments, but after being insulted by their power I lost my patience. I suggested them to delete this paper; however, Racconish continuously used his/her power to claim "notability criteria not met" to the paper, although I provided verified sources. At least, editor ThemFromSpace could recognize the notability of what I wrote:

Hi, I removed the db-bio tag you placed on this article. This type of deletion is only appropriate for articles that don't contain any credible assertions of notability. This article contains many such assertions (the whole "Research" section for example). ThemFromSpace 15:20, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I still don't see any 3rd party assertion on notability, only references to academic publications. Cheers, Racconish Tk 15:28, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

  There doesn't have to be any third-party sources present if the article makes a credible assertion of notability. This is a weaker standard than the notability guidelines used to delete articles at AfD. I'd suggest you try and PROD this article or take it to AfD if you don't think he is notable. ThemFromSpace 15:39, 12 December 2010 (UTC) 

It is not fair to use "power" to insult me by "The article may be deleted if this message remains in place for seven days", since I already asked you to delete my paper immediately. I did not want to write more in this Wiki. I was enough experienced.

Hi! I, Compactembedding, am the author of Peter Hästö. Thank you for all! When I wrote this article, I provided all sources that you can check. You very carelessly edited what I wrote. Now I lost my patience, since you, Racconish, have suspected me as a "bad guy". My final decision is "would you please delete my article?". As a researcher, I do not accept such a way to insult the other. I planned to write more with a short survey about Peter's contributions. But I guess this will also be deleted. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Compactembedding (talk • contribs) 02:18, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Racconish! I decided to write about Peter because, besides his many publications, I found him have the book accepted by Springer "In 2010, his book entitled Lebesgue and Sobolev spaces with variable exponents (with L. Diening, P. Harjulehto and M. Růžička) was accepted to be published in Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2011. This is the first book about Lebesgue and Sobolev spaces in variable exponent settings. Sample chapters of this book can be found in [11]." You deleted this important part, so the article has become meaningless! Therefore I have one more reason for you to DELETE it. You claimed "prohibited purposes". Ok! Ok! Do you think referees or reviewers of journals and research projects are immature? Is that what you have learned to claim how I am? Any way, you can find out one more reason to delete the article! Fortunately, I did not set any "calling for donation", which many people are doing, in my article! Thank God! Compactembedding

Please note personal attacks are not accepted here. Requesting verifiable sources is not a "power" play nor an insult but the normal process of WP, particularly when notability is at stake. Could it be that your real concern is the case raised at SPI? Anyway, further to your request, I put a {{db-g7}} speedy deletion template on Peter Hästö.   Racconish ^Tk 09:36, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 10:11, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010

The recent edit you made to Peter Hästö constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:16, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. My final serious request is "deleting my article". I am sorry that I myself could not delete it. Compactembedding.

• Please don't put messages or comments in articles, as you did recently at Peter Hästö. Such comments belong either on the talk page of the article, such as Talk:Peter Hästö, or else the talk page of the user to whom the message is addressed. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:09, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Dear JamesBWatson,

Thank you for deleting my article as my serious request. Regarding the book I wrote about, today I found that it has been appeared:

http://www.springer.com/mathematics/analysis/book/978-3-642-18362-1

The Springer's introduction may tell you how reliable my writing was. But that was the story in the past.

Although you deleted my article, I still found its title in Wiki. Would you kindly delete its title as well? Thank you.

Sincerely,

Compactembedding

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for abuse of multiple accounts. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:46, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

For reference, this is because of your confirmed account Niceman 1 (talk · contribs). — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:47, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

My answer

What I should say is that one claimed "abuse of multiple accounts" has had something immature in his mind! He or she should study more. That is all. If one wants to be respected by others, he should be honest. Whenever one wants to discuss about mathematics research, he should know how to judge what others write in mathematics! What happened regarding my article gave me more chances to trust Wikileaks.

I shared my story with my best colleague, when I felt doubtful about Wiki's editors in mathematics. I found he gave several links. It seems that his links annoyed people who deleted an important part in my paper. Then we were claimed "bad guys". If my colleague had also claimed my article was excellent or something like that, that would have been doubtful.

I do not like to talk about something like that. But it seems to me that many people who are responsible for "editing" should be re-educated and re-trained, I should leave this comment. Certainly, if they are good and mature enough, it may be okay.

Before Wikileaks released, I did love a country very much. But then I started thinking about that country. Now it seems that I was provided more evidence. I do not think I will contribute any more article, after I requested my article to be deleted, so one does not have to.... I just wanted to have a look at what the "good and mature" wrote in my talk.

If possible, please block my IP permanently, then you, yourself, together will praise together, and continue to insult this "bad guy".

Compactembedding.