User talk:Shreyasjoshis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] RSA
Could you please tell us, what you find misleading about the RSA page. There are a few things in the article that can be improved, as with many other wikipedia articles. It's just not clear what particular problem may need to be addressed. 85.1.97.120 09:43, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
hey you don't have a user page, hope you check back here. I was studying from here and I guess I found something misleading, I'm sorry I've forgotten what it was :( I have hence removed the {misleading}. Sorry. If I find out again, I will post it on the talk page. -Weedrat 13:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. If you add any unclarity on the talk page, that would certainly be helpful. 85.2.118.91 14:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Diagonal intercept clipping
A tag has been placed on Diagonal intercept clipping, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Fabrictramp 21:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Diagonal intercept clipping
Hello Shreyasjoshis, I had a suggestion regarding Diagonal intercept clipping. Perhaps you can make the article in userspace here: User:Shreyasjoshis/Diagonal intercept clipping. When it's ready for mainspace, you can move it there. -- Samir 04:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- I was about to suggest the same thing. Placeholder articles are deleted pretty quickly, as you've seen. -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 04:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Note
I userfied your recently created userbox and moved it to User:UBX/Shrek_fan - I think that's what you wanted to do. Be careful of the namespaces next time. :-) -- Mentifisto 11:41, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] AfD nomination of Diagonal intercept clipping
An editor has nominated Diagonal intercept clipping, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diagonal intercept clipping and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
"The authors are trying to sell their proposed idea" - We are not selling our idea. We want the entire world to know about this. Is there a better way of doing this than wikipedia? Isn't this the spirit of wikipedia? You didn't have to pay to access the paper . Its for everyone. Our desire to let everyone interested in line clipping know about this method, does not warrant a deletion.
"The article's source makes nonsensical claims of optimal efficiency over other well-known and mature algorithms" - This algorithm has been implemented and tested. Agreed, it will be difficult to get the exact same numbers when you execute it on different computers, but the difference between the cohen-sutherland and this algorithm should remain approximately the same.
"the authors obviously don't understand the concepts behind the complexity issues of line clipping" - Teach us.
"make dubious claims when comparing their method to other methods of line clipping" - As I said earlier, these claims are not dubious.
Again, as far as the google groups link is concerned, I wanted to clarify the person's doubts about this method, and HELP him for FREE. THIS IS NOT FOR SALE (which is why it is on wikipedia in the first place).
[edit] Re: Diagonal intercept clipping
I was replying specifically to your comment, where it sounded like the purpose of the article was to "spread the word" (the first paragraph of this). I'm searching online, and all that searching for the name finds me is Wikipedia mirrors. The only place I can find it published is a paper that Google Scholar turned up, which has your name at the top. That's just not enough coverage to make it fit Wikipedia's notability guidelines. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 17:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
