User talk:Cmouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Did you know?

[edit] Image:Red Spotted Newt.jpg

I have tagged your image as {{GFDL-presumed}}. Is that the correct licence for it? If not, you can change to anything you like. If it is, please change it to {{GFDL-self}}. Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 09:28, May 16, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Intel International Science and Engineering Fair

indeed, the ISEF has its own page PeregrineAY July 3, 2005 11:13 (UTC)

[edit] Public distributed artificial intelligence

The article Public distributed artificial intelligence on which you commented on the talk page seems to be hoax. Can you verify that? I think it should be deleted. Thank you. --Silvestre Zabala 21:57, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Blouse.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Blouse.jpg. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much, Matjlav 23:18, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding the merged article on the HBP page.

Also posted to HBP's talk page

As far as I've been told, this was added in because a deleted page was voted to be merged into this page. Talk to Tony Sidaway if you have any questions, but please don't remove it without talking to him first. Ral315 05:54, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Misc

sorry bout my other edit, i meant dark side of the moon. haha im retarded, sorry --yoshi 22:45, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] External links in NLP page

Could you please explain why you systematically remove the LinguaStream link in the [Natural Language Processing] page ? There are links to several other comaprable platforms or tools (such as GATE), so why do you want to remove this one ?

I work in the field and haven't heard of your system so I'd like you to verify the notablilty of your system on the talk page. This can be as easy as a paper published at LREC, HLT-NAACL or other conference. I know of GATE so I haven't removed it. Thanks! Cmouse 16:01, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I also work in the field and although I know GATE, I've never heard about other listed systems. So should I remove them from the page ? I mean, the point of an open encyclopaedia is rather to add information you know rather than removing the information you don't know about. And if you consider you have a superior authority in the field please make explicit the fact that you claim ownership of the NLP page. As for academic publications related to LinguaStream, there are a bunch referenced on the "Publications" page. Best regards.

The only information I've remove are external links which are added by users where: 1) I've never heard of the system. 2) A quick google search does not bring up a scientific paper. 3) The user didn't make any other edits. 4) The link is not from a college or other academic site. If you watch this page, you must realize that many people add their own favorite ontology. Wikipedia is not a web directory and if every moderately notable ontology got added that's what Ontology (computer science) would turn into. Keep in mind that I haven't added my system to the list. Also I haven't (yet) removed any links from the article. The ontology article needs to be cleaned up a bit. Want to get an account here and help me? Cmouse 03:42, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually I don't really mind if our system gets listed in the NLP page, but I'm still astonished by your "moderation rules". First, the fact that you've never heard of a system is definitely not a valid criterion. You would probably find people who do not know GATE, and who still won't remove the link from the page. And as for LinguaStream, the site is actually hosted by our university (our laboratory is part of the CNRS), and a google search actually returns scientific papers. I understand that a Wikipedia page should not end up as a a wek directory, but in this case there should be no link at all. To me things like MARF of NLTK are totally marginal, while LinguaStream is one of the very few systems in the world that are comparable to GATE (and even superior to on several points). But of course if conservatism is the rule...

Well, first off I haven't had time to clean up the article but I'm watching the article to make sure all additions to the article are acceptable. This is a valid and common practice in wikipedia - just because I edit an article doesn't mean I am responsible for everything in the article. So I can't be held accountable for the external links that were on the page before I started watching it. I wish I had infinite time to make all these improvements to wikipedia and still do everything else I do, but that's not possible. And it's the responsibility of the person adding a link to show its relevance - not the page editor. I didn't have time to find out who owned your domain name, to search through more than two pages of my google search to find an academic paper, or to read your whole site. You're also explicitly discouraged from adding links to your own sites or research. Cmouse 06:11, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

Just thought you might be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Hogwarts (2nd nomination) because you participated in the first vote. Savidan 21:08, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rspeer

I'm sorry if you thought I was accusing you/Rspeer of having a sockpuppet. (See:User talk:Rspeer too) Moe ε 22:15, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

 :) Accepted. No harm done. Cmouse 23:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)