User talk:Jodawiki

Welcome!

Hello, Jodawiki, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Moonraker (talk) 07:31, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ulysses (novel)

Hello JD: I have removed your concordance from this article. In addition to legibility and formatting issues (a simple link would be better than a miniature version of the first page), the analysis is not likely to be of much use to most editors, and raises the question of original research (for example, is it valid to ignore the author's punctuation?). If you feel it belongs, it would be best to raise it at the article talk page, and start a new section there to discuss it.[1] In articles such as this, it is difficult to keep external links to a reasonable level, and advanced technical tools such as your work may be too far afield for most readers. Best regards, Kablammo (talk) 00:13, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kablammo,

some remarks:

1. I managed, with a my special computer program (partly running for days), to substantially increase the "normal" N-gram boundaries, and at the same time, taking into account the complete corpus, to obtain non-repeating results. This is, I think, the first time that this is possible, and the text normalization (omitting punctuation) plays an important role in this analysis.

2. The results indicate at first glance which text repetitions the author performed, consciously or unconsciously.

3. Furthermore, one can see quite quickly, usually within the context, people, things, places, events. These results can then be used as keywords for search operations within the original.

4. For literary scholars, the evaluation of the offered results are certainly of interest, e.g. for work on concordances; linguists for the TTR calculation, and the ratios of total length to the number of unigrams. The data is provided in a form that allows further evaluation.

Ok, I must admit that the presentation of my work was somewhat unreasonable, on which I did not have had any influence,sorry. --Jodawiki (talk) 11:35, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I added a link back, without the image. Perhaps an explication of the analysis could appear at Wikiversity, if you desire. It likely would run afoul of the prohibition of original research if it placed on Wikipedia. Best regards, Kablammo (talk) 17:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]