User talk:Sijothankam/Low-dimensional chaos

Low-dimensional chaos

How come you conclude this article is not worthy !!! I am writing this article one by one in my spare time. Can you tell me where you people had seen the clear explanation of butterfly effect ? Do you think the bouncing ball system in the Wikipedia is complete?? That is not the point here. When people here about chaos they think about complex systems. So for a beginner chaos is something difficult. But there is something called low dimensional chaos which is highly simple to understand. I think we can group all the other topics on chaos together. The list is not over, I write more about chaos in simple systems, but if you are not satisfied with the article, I am sorry. I will not be a volunteer anymore. Be patient when you see a developing venture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.141.49.11 (talk • contribs)

You are very welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia, but in order to be a useful contributer you need to understand and respect our standards and policies. There are several problems with this article:

It does not give its sources. Every Wikipedia article must refer to reliable sources; articles based on original research are not allowed on Wikipedia.
It is written in an essay style, often addressing the reader directly using "we". Wikipedia articles shoould generally be written in the third person.
We already have an extensive article on the logistic map, and a shorter one on bouncing ball dynamics. If you want to write about these subjects, it would be better to start by adding to these articles, rather than writing a new article that covers the same ground.

You might like to read Wikipedia:Writing better articles, which contains a lot of useful advice for new editors. Gandalf61 (talk) 08:14, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there are problems with the draft article as it stands. However:

Sources can be added - this is clearly not original research and is based on reliable sources even if they are not yet cited.
Style can be fixed (and one of the third-person exceptions is mathematics, although possibly not as used here)
There is no reason that one article should not include summaries of several others. This can be a useful summary of LDC, although doubtless guidance on both style and content would be valuable and appreciated.

Rich Farmbrough, 14:57, 17 May 2011 (UTC).[reply]