Hello Akritas2. Please see WT:WPM#User:Akritas2's edits in Sturm's theorem and Root-finding algorithm. You may respond there if you wish. EdJohnston (talk) 16:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Root-finding algorithm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sage (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You asked me my opinion on Budan's theorem article. It is interesting, but it does not yet follow the Wikipedia standard, in particular in the lead. See MOS:MATH for relevant guidelines. Also, a large proportion of the references cite the main editor of the article (you). This is strongly discouraged by Wikipedia (see WP:COI and WP:NPOV. Also the title is not convenient as it reflects only a part of the article, which subject is (in my opinion) "mathematical and historical foundations of the root-finding algorithm using Descartes' rule of signs". I have no idea to a better name, but I have added the name Fourier's theorem on polynomial real roots through a redirect

But the main question about it is the following:

To which reader this article may be useful?

In my opinion, in the present state of Wikipedia and of the article, it may useful only for the specialists of the subjec. This is relevant for a scientific publication but not for an article in an encyclopedia. In my opinion, for being of encyclopedic interest, this article should appear as further reading for an article Polynomial root-finding. As shown by the red link, this article does not exists, and this is related to the second part of the Section title.

In fact, the algorithms of Computer algebra and most of their mathematical foundations are very badly covered by Wikipedia. Here are some examples: There is no article about Collins and nothing about multivariate resultants (red links that I have inserted in Algebraic geometry#Computational algebraic geometry). Before my edits, Root-finding algorithm did not mention any method based on Descartes' rule of signs and cite Sturm's algorithm only to say that it is too slow for being useful.

The intent of my edits in this latter article was to say to the numerous people who know only numeric computation: "Yes, there are non-numeric algorithms that are competitive for polynomial root-finding". I was not satisfied by the result, but I am afraid that your edits are confusing by making less clear this implicit message. In my opinion there is a further work to do here:

• To create a page Polynomial root-finding or Root-finding of polynomials, with, at least, sections "numerical algorithms", "Sturm's method", "VCA method", "VAS method", "Case of multiples roots" (The term "method" allows to describe, in subsection the different variants, which are, in fact, different algorithms).
• Adding {{main|polynomial root-finding}} at the beginning of section "Root finding of polynomials" of Root-finding algorithm
• Remove the subsections and the paragraph beginning by "The algorithm for isolating the roots ..." in this section: the material should be moved in the new article after being rewritten and wikified.

Because of the number of readers who may be interested in practical root-finding, this work seem important. Maybe you and your students may help.

Another related subject for which help would be welcome is Polynomial greatest common divisor. In fact I have not found in Wikipedia the mention of the various remainder sequences (in particular, subresultant sequences) nor of the modular GCD algorithms. Again, lacking of time, I have only inserted red links.

This is a very small part of what having to done of having an acceptable covering of Computer algebra by Wikipedia.

Sincerely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D.Lazard (talk • contribs) 18:29, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Lazard. Regarding the second half of your comments I agree with you and my students and I will be happy to collaborate with you on expanding the Wikipedia coverage of computer algebra topics. However, this will have to wait for the next "cycle" which will start in the next spring semester. Please make a list of "to do" items for us and we will get to it in our own time frame.

As for your WP:COI comments on Budan's theorem I think you are totally wrong. COI editing involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote your own interests and I am not doing that. I have included the absolutely minimum number of my papers in order to present a "verifiable" narrative (I have brought the number of references down to 15). As a Professor of the History of Mathematics told me, since I am the only one who dealt with the topic that is just fine.

Ditto for your WP:NPOV comments on Budan's theorem. NPOV means representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources and I am doing that. Again, as I am the only one who has dealt with this topic, I have not left out any other sources.

Again, except for the very beginning, it has been a pleasure interacting with you.

Akritas2 (talk) 14:33, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Akritas2 (talk · contribs), you have incorrectly interpreted our WP:COI guidelines. If you are the author of the papers you are adding, you have a COI according to our rules and should use the request edit templates on article talk pages, rather than editing the articles yourself with sources that you wrote and published. Please participate in the Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion that is happening now regarding your edits. See the link at the end of this page.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:37, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.

Thank you for your time,
the wub (talk) 17:31, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using Global message delivery)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CookieMonster755 was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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 User:Akritas2/Modified resultant and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the .
• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CookieMonster755 (talk) 18:49, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! CookieMonster755 (talk) 18:49, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Akritas2. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Modified resultant".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Rankersbo (talk) 09:50, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Akritas2. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Akritas2. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted.

It appears that almost all your edits of Wikipedia articles are aimed to cite your own papers and/or pushing your own opinions and work. This behavior is strictly forbidden in Wikipedia, and may lead to be blocked for editing Wikipedia. D.Lazard (talk) 15:18, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. D.Lazard (talk) 16:53, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Akritas2

Thank you for creating Vincent's theorem.

User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating this article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn Ω (contact) 03:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]