User talk:Krajcsi

Number system

What was wrong with the Table Numeral Systems template in the Numeral system article? Krajcsi (talk) 15:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello. Most of the articles in the template are about ancient or non-western symbols for numbers. These correspond more closely to the linguistic/historical notion of "numeral". Still, I accept that there is some overlap between the two... Regards. FilipeS (talk) 19:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, first half of the article discusses many historical notations. Number names article is only about the linguistical notation. Still I believe that the tamplate should be included in Numeral systems. Krajcsi (talk) 20:28, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I have no objection to including the template in both articles... FilipeS (talk) 20:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

,

Cogstat

Thanks for message. To me, and presumably the SD nominator, an article that is sourced only to its own website and just lists the claimed features (presumably again from its own website), looks pretty promotional.

The article clearly isn't ready for article space:

• you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the software organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the software producer claims or interviewing its managers. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.
• There is absolutely nothing to suggest that it meets the notability criteria above, even if your unsourced text is actually factual. Without independent third-party sources, it can't be notable.

In the circumstances, I'll shortly restore as a draft Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:21, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Restored at Draft:CogStat Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:25, 5 April 2019 (UTC)