User talk:JordanMicahBennett

Your submission at Articles for creation: User:JordanMicahBennett/sandbox (July 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

.

To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

j⚛e decker ^talk 15:30, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

JordanMicahBennett, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi JordanMicahBennett! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Nathan2055 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:10, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) 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 necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:39, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:JordanMicahBennett/sandbox

Hello JordanMicahBennett. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "sandbox".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|User:JordanMicahBennett/sandbox}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. TKK! bark with me! 21:20, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:18, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) (June 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by StarryGrandma was:

While you have a list of references at the end they are too general to support the statements in the article. You need to provide reliable sources independent of the original author (who seems to be yourself).

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

StarryGrandma (talk) 00:34, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Draft:Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature). This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge. Thank you. JordanMicahBennett (talk) 01:34, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) (June 28)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Neither this page nor the one in mainspace belongs in mainspace. Resubmitting this one for AFC while AFD is pending is tendentious.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 02:36, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature)

Draft:Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature), a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:14, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature). Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Redirecting to a different page is equivalent to removing the template from a page that has been nominated for deletion. The deletion discussion will run its course. If there is any further interference with the deletion discussion, it will be reported at WP:ANI. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:58, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Causal Neural Paradox (Thought Curvature) while logged out. Making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of more than one account or IP address per person. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:05, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, wikipedia is not a web hosting service. Using Wikipedia:User pages for storing your original research is abuse of wikipedia. If you continue doing this, your editing privileges will be removed. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:13, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JordanMicahBennett. It appears that the chief purpose of the remaining content of your user page is to insult other Wikipedia users. Although you are not necessarily under any obligation to remove that content, you might want to consider doing so, if you want to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. Please review WP:POLEMIC. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:07, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of The Consciousness Prior

The article The Consciousness Prior has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Paper was only published last month, no indication of notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ... discospinster _talk 18:35, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for operating a single purpose account for the sole purpose of promoting your own theories.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:42, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I received your email. If you want to be unblocked you need to follow the directions in the message directly above this. ~ GB fan 17:40, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Upon further examination, any request for unblock will need to address your relationship with User:CausalCode in addition to the reasons in the above block notice. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:32, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, you need to address all alternative accounts you have, not just the one mentioned above. ~ GB fan 18:38, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And, as it now also appears that several of your submissions have turned out to be copyright violations that will need to be addressed as well. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:22, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network

Draft:Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:39, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network

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 Draft:Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-build-an-Edward-Witten-String-theory-powered-artificial-neural-network. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Adam9007 (talk) 21:10, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Supermanifold Hypothesis in Deep Learning

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 Draft:Supermanifold Hypothesis in Deep Learning requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Adam9007 (talk) 21:13, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Strange deletion of Draft:Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network

This message regards:

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Draft:Supersymmetric_Artificial_Neural_Network

https://i.imgur.com/DhV8vDg.png

Beeblebrox is one of the editors concerning the deletion of the Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network related pages.

Here are Beeblebrox' words:

"Draft not submitted at AFC. This was created by a single purpose account who only writes about their own research. It reminds me very much of an editor I ran across years ago who wrote about Tibetan Buddhism. Their prose was so thick I couldn’t make the least bit of sense of it. I assumed it was due to my lack of knowledge of Tibetan Buddhism, but when persons more familiar witty the subject read their writing they couldn’t make sense of it either.

I am by no means an expert on mathematics or machine learning, but I suspect something similar is happening here and at the end of the day this is original research and/or a synthesis based on the work of others dressed up like something real and notable with lots of citations. (see also:This previous nomination of one of their articles and the nature of their defense of it, which fits with my narrative of what is going on here) Will be bundling in a few other such pages momentarily."

My response:

1) Note that I am an atheist, so the Buhddist comparison is probably a bad one.

2) If you are not machine learning aware, I recommend my book, Artificial Neural Networks for kids: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321162382_Artificial_Neural_Nets_For_Kids

3) Dr. Eray Ozkural, the winner of Kurzweil 2015 AGI award, mentions that my Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network model is something worth trying, although it would require my interaction with an experimental physicist, with string theory experience.

See his comments among some facebook comments here (See the 17th to last comment amongst the 72 comments between he and I, in the search result regarding e8-GUT and my "Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network"): https://www.facebook.com/groups/ai.philosophy/search/?query=e8

4) Note also that my "Supersymmetric Artificial Neural Network" model has been accepted to the 6th global conference for artificial intelligence and neural networks: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dYxgfHmCh9aOVR36uABu2lL-k4_0VLge/view?fbclid=IwAR0NPw5LrKW6O3dO9-CqLlaW18rwSkFxPXaxCAy1duyoKmlDM2HPVBKD9T4

5) Note also that the intention of the account was not to be a single purpose account. I had created other accounts, which were used to also edit general topics on Wikipedia. I thought then that the blocked account was attributed with the other general edits (I had forgotten that I had created other accounts).

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Orders_of_magnitude_(numbers)&diff=864214265&oldid=770699965

I will try to respond to this so that you may better understand what is going on here, but I must admit I’m beginning to feel like you aren’t really trying to comprehend the issues that led to your block.

You’re an atheist. Ok. That completely misses the point of my comments about the Buddhist writer. Since you have copied what I wrote here I would invite you to read the remarks again. The issue is not in any way what your religious beliefs may be but rather your writing style here on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is written for a general audience. Although it contains many articles on technology and mathematics, it is not a technical journal or a place to publish your own original theories. It is therefore expected that you write ina manner that can be comprehended by a general audience.

That being said, it follows that our readers should not have to read an entire book, even a children’s book, before reading your contributions here. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, it is intended to be the starting point for researching a subject.

What somebody said on Facebook, no matter who they are, has no bearing on any of this.

Being a single purpose account is not in and of itself inherently against Wikipedia policy. Having an account only to promote your own theories and research is.

I hope this clarifies some of these points for you. And again, you are free to appeal this block using the method outlined in the block notice above. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:59, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, many things have been clarified. I'll try to appeal the block on the premise of item 5 stated by myself above.

1. A huge concern of mine regarding your review earlier, is that although you claimed to lack machine learning expertise, you boldly/confidently made expressions that supposedly implicated my work as nonsense. (In this regard, Dr. Eray's comments on my work are quite relevant, as he is somebody who has a lot of machine learning expertise.)

2. In future encounters, I ask that you aim to avoid concluding the viability of one's work as nonsense, especially when you claim to lack expertise in fields regarding said work. (JordanMicahBennett) 02:11, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Donating copyrighted materials

Not sure exactly what it is you want from me ('confirm the post'?), but have you read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials? Adam9007 (talk) 00:14, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You said the content (in one of the pages anyway. Don't know about the others) is yours. That page explains what you need to do if you want it available on Wikipedia. Adam9007 (talk) 01:56, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The other pages contain my content as does the one you refer to. Thanks for the advice. (However as "Beeblebrox" specifies, Wikipedia is not for original research.) (JordanMicahBennett)