User talk:Identityandconsulting

February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Semantic Web do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.

The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: '\bwordpress\.com' (link(s): http://methainternet.wordpress.com/2008/01/27/from-logic-to-ontology-the-limit-of-%e2%80%9cthe-semantic-web%e2%80%9d/) . If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thorougly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creators copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! XLinkBot (talk) 13:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Undecidable problem

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Undecidable problem, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 02:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the recent edit you made to Undecidable problem has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Ixfd64 (talk) 07:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am a new user, You could erase all my contributions, I am boring, It is very hard to contribute in Wikipedia! --Identityandconsulting (talk) 21:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Semantic Web

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Semantic Web. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Please, your article (whether linked or embedded) is a clear breach of Wikipedia:No original research. Your attempts to repeatedly add it to the page are unhelpful here and look like nothing more than edit warring. Whatever merit your viewpoint and opinion might have, this isn't the way to evangelise it.
- Andy Dingley (talk) 10:51, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am a new user, You could erase all my contributions, I am boring, It is very hard to contribute in Wikipedia! --Identityandconsulting (talk) 21:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The limit of The Semantic Web

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article The limit of The Semantic Web, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 18:00, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am a new user, You could erase all my contributions, I am boring, It is very hard to contribute in Wikipedia! --Identityandconsulting (talk) 21:31, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Undecidable problem

SOmeone has suggested merging Undecidable problem, which you wrote, with decision problem, which you probably were unaware of. I think a merger sounds like a good idea. What do you think? — Carl (CBM · talk) 17:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it is ok! --Identityandconsulting (talk) 21:18, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The limit of the semantic web

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The limit of the semantic web, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of The limit of the semantic web. Blanchardb-^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}-timed 23:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

¡Ola!

You seem to be having a hard time getting started! Please don’t give up! Moonraker12 (talk) 18:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-formal or Inconsistency Logic: LACAN’s LOGIC. Gödel’s incompleteness theorems,

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Non-formal or Inconsistency Logic: LACAN’s LOGIC. Gödel’s incompleteness theorems,, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Non-formal or Inconsistency Logic: LACAN’s LOGIC. Gödel’s incompleteness theorems,.

AfD nomination of The limit of the semantic web

An article that you have been involved in editing, The limit of the semantic web, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The limit of the semantic web. Thank you. Corvus cornix_talk 23:29, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop

Please stop moving about pages under deletion debate, pretending that you are not the author of the article, introducing false deadlines, and other disruptive behavior. Please also stop creating articles with overly complex and incomprehensible titles. If you do not continue you will be blocked as a disruptive account. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 06:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted your user page for being a violation of our policy not allowing copies of articles to be one's user page. Wikipedia is not a web host. We are not a publisher for your papers. Please review our policies and guidelines before contributing further. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 06:26, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I now see that you, in fact, have been told before not to include your essays. I'm blocking your account for one week. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 06:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated.⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 06:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Identityandconsulting (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

[edit]Not to disruptive edits!

I am so sorry, but I am a new user, and It is very hard to publish in Wikipedia.

I am the author of the article, I do not want to lie about that subject introducing false deadlines, and other disruptive behavior. I tried to merge the article into semantic web, but although I have red the merge page, I do know how to do it properly. I do not want to create articles with overly complex and incomprehensible titles, I was trying to merge the article! but it does not work properly! I do not know that my user page was being a violation of your policy not allowing copies of articles. In fact I write the articles first in my user page, and then publish it!

I do not know until now where I have been told before not to include essays! I am looking for it but I could not found it. Francisco Antonio Cerón García

I am a new user, You could erase all my contributions, I am boring, It is very hard to contribute in Wikipedia! Francisco Antonio Cerón García

Decline reason:

Request to unblock denied, for now. Please read the policy about original research, and confirm that you have understood it and won't re-post the page anywhere on Wikipedia (at least, not without editor consensus), and I will unblock you. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 10:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Identityandconsulting (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand what you tell me and that is why I am not publishing neither this article nor any other.

As my mother tongue is Spanish I did not realize that essay and original research means the same.

It is true, I posted an article, The Limit of The Semantic Web, and it was deleted on the 12th of February, but I did not realize it was considered as an original research. I republished the article and asked for an expert opinion, but it was deleted again although it was under dispute and my account was blocked so I could not do anything to defend the article.

I have read Original Research, and I understood completely the meaning and the sense of that policy, but I think that it does not matter whether you unblock my account or not if an article under dispute is deleted! Francisco Antonio Cerón García

Wikipedia is not for non-profit-making people, people who want to contribute for free towards the knowledge of the humans being!

Decline reason:

Ok, your English is a little hard to understand. I may not be completely understanding what you've said but I don't think you see the problems with what you've done. I'm sorry if it seems like we're hassling you, but your edits were inappropriate, and people tried to communicate with you about this but it hasn't worked. Mango juice^talk 03:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Identityandconsulting (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

What Wikipedia is not Your "The Limit of The Semantic Web" article is best published in, perhaps, an academic journal of some sort (online or print), where it would be subject to peer review by people highly familiar with the subject. Until that happens, Wikipedia is not the place for your contribution. Just imagine Wikipedia were a place for original research: the site (and don't forget there are 2 million+ articles) would have to bring together all manner of experts to pass judgement on all contributions. Do you not agree that that would be logistically unworkable? Pádraig Coogan (talk) 01:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC) I agree with your thinking, I understood the meaning and the sense of that policy! Thanks you very much for your helping! Francisco Antonio Cerón García --Identityandconsulting (talk) 22:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Decline reason:

This is not a valid unblock request. Any further usage of the unblock template will result in this page being protected to prevent further abuse. -MBK₀₀₄ 01:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Identityandconsulting (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I will Keep in mind, Wikipedia is not for original research! I understand what you tell me and that is why I am not publishing neither this article nor any other. I will no publish an essay/original research in Wikipedia anymore! As you could read, I have send my article, "The Limit of The Semantic Web", to ARXIV's online print, an academic journal, where it would be subject to peer review by people highly familiar with the subject. arXiv.org > cs > arXiv:0802.2736 Search or Article-id

(mathComputer Science > Computation and Language Title: The limit of the Semantic Web Authors: Francisco Antonio Cerón García (Submitted on 20 Feb 2008)

Decline reason:

I see no reason to lift the block early. It will expire in 3 days; when it does please stop creating articles of your own original research. — Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:24, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

disruptive edits

I am so sorry, but I am a new user, and It is very hard to publish in Wikipedia.

I am the author of the article, I do not want to lie about that subject introducing false deadlines, and other disruptive behavior. I tried to merge the article into semantic web, but although I have red the merge page, I do know how to do it properly. I do not want to create articles with overly complex and incomprehensible titles, I was trying to merge the article! but it does not work properly! I do not know that my user page was being a violation of your policy not allowing copies of articles. In fact I write the articles first in my user page, and then publish it! I do not know until now where I have been told before not to include essays! I am looking for it but I could not found it. I am a new user, You could erase all my contributions, I am boring, It is very hard to contribute in Wikipedia! Francisco Antonio Cerón García --Identityandconsulting (talk) 10:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not knowing about the prohibition on essays? The fact is that on Feb 12, with the deletion of your original article, the reason given was 'essay / original research'. Unbeatablevalue (talk) 16:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is true that I have post an article, The Limit of The Semantic Web, and it was deleted on the Feb 12, without I realize that it was consider an original research. I republish the article again and ask for an expert opinion, but it was deleted again although it was in a dispute and as I was blocked I could not did nothing to defend the article.

I have read Original Research, and I understood completely the meaning and the sense of that policy, but I think that it does not matter if you unblock or block me if an article on dispute will be delete!

Wikipedia is not for people who contribute free without earn money to the knowledge of the humans been! --Identityandconsulting (talk) 19:55, 18 February 2008 (UTC) Francisco Antonio Cerón García[reply]

What Wikipedia is not

Your "The Limit of The Semantic Web" article is best published in, perhaps, an academic journal of some sort (online or print), where it would be subject to peer review by people highly familiar with the subject. Until that happens, Wikipedia is not the place for your contribution. Just imagine Wikipedia were a place for original research: the site (and don't forget there are 2 million+ articles) would have to bring together all manner of experts to pass judgement on all contributions. Do you not agree that that would be logistically unworkable? Pádraig Coogan (talk) 01:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your thinking, I understood the meaning and the sense of that policy! Thanks you very much for your helping! --Identityandconsulting (talk) 22:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your block expires on 24 February, so you are welcome to edit constructively after that time. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 04:35, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--Identityandconsulting (talk) 10:03, 20 February 2008 (UTC)I will no publish an essay/original research in Wikipedia anymore! Francisco Antonio Cerón García[reply]

As you could read, I have send my article, "The Limit of The Semantic Web", to ARXIV's online print, an academic journal, where it would be subject to peer review by people highly familiar with the subject. arXiv.org > cs > arXiv:0802.2736 Search or Article-id(Help | Advanced search)

 All papers Titles Authors Abstracts Full text Help pages

Keep in mind, Wikipedia is not for original research. Stop working around the policies and guidelines. Thank you. Unbeatablevalue (talk) 16:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nota: Este mensaje es en español, para tratar de ayudarte. Ten en cuenta que toda la correspondencia y artículos publicados aqui deben ser en inglés, pero hacemos esta excepción para tratar de ayudarte. Creo que has entendido que Wikipedia es una enciclopedia y no un sitio para publicar ensayos. Todo lo que se escribe debe poder ser verificado, y no debe provenir de tus propias ideas y estudios. Si te puedo ser de ayuda para explicarte esto en más detalle, puedes enviarmen un email (ver indicaciones en mi página) o preguntar aquí en forma concisa una vez que venza el bloqueo administrativo. Suerte. Alexf⁴² 23:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translation: This message is in Spanish to try to help you. Please understand that all correspondence and articles published here should be written in English, but we are making an exception to try to help you. I believe you have understood that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a place to publish essays. Everything that is written must be verifiable, and it should not come from your own ideas and studies. If I can be of help to explain this to you in more detail, you can email me (details in my page) or ask here in concise form once the admin block expires. Good Luck. Alexf⁴² 00:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]