User talk:Punar1

Welcome!

Hello, Punar1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Melchoir 03:10, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Andreas Karlsson

The article Andreas Karlsson has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This happened because the article seems to be about a person or group of persons but it does not indicate how or why that person or group is notable. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. You might also want to read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles. howch e ng {chat} 18:49, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beat System

The article Beat System has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This happened because the article seems to be about a person or group of persons but it does not indicate how or why that person or group is notable. If you can indicate why the subject is really notable, you are free to re-create the article, making sure to cite any verifiable sources. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. You might also want to read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles. Please also read the guidelines for articles on musical acts. Thanks. howch e ng {chat} 23:51, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alfred A. Tomatis

I just noticed the comments you had left on Centrx's talk page and thought I'd comment.

Any search for Tomatis on Google will show that the method he developed is still widely used. I could mention this in the article. I also had links there to two sites which again had references to their sources (one was to Quackwatch, the other one, I can't remember unfortunately, and finding it on the internet again is like looking for a needle in a stack of salespersons).

The first site linked to was to Quackwatch and the only mention of Tomatis was the line, "In 1997, the FDA banned the importation of the Electric Ear or any other AIT device made by Tomatis International, of Paris, France."
The second link was to what appears to be a student essay, which itself isn't really all that reliable...and even if it was, the conclusion was that most of the studies were unscientific and had little evidence behind them.
Third was a link to his own site...not valid for verification.

My point isn't necessarily that he doesn't deserve a page. His name does return quite a few hits on Google. I'm just pointing out that the links you chose to provide really didn't establish notability on their own. --Onorem 13:56, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Onorem.

The Tomatis method is a form of audiatory training, and the Quackwatch link refers to general informataion about such, which I have also noted next to the link.
I don't know whether the Vanderbilt page was written by a student or a professor, and I don't care as long as it's well written. The conclusion in the article is as one could expect for a dubious method like the Tomatis Method. It would be a lot more surprising if the author had found a good scientific study that supported this method. The reliability of this source is a matter of opinion. But it far better than what is considered a "Source of dubious reliability" (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/WP:V)
None of the other links were added by me. In my opinion they are advertisements and should be removed according to Wikipedias verifiability policy. But I don't feel I have enough Wiki-experience to start deleting other peoples contributions yet.

The two links added by me have further references to other material (books) about the Tomatis Method and general Auditory training, so anyone who is interested in this method can follow these to check up on the articles.

However, since this treatment is still widely in use, I feel it's important that people are informed that the method is questionable at most. It's almost impossible to find non-pro-Tomatis information using Google so I really think a Wikipedia article is neccessary. Although the article is poor, readers are well warned through the tags that the method probably doesn't work at all the way the proponents claim.

I would love it if the article was improved, but I really can't do much since I don't have any first hand information.

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Punar1! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 6 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

Cecilia Vennersten - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 17:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In regard to your recent edits in Uniblue Powersuite

Please consider reading Wikipedia:Manual of Style (words to watch). Fleet Command (talk) 14:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]