Talk:Florentin Smarandache
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on January 14, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This is a controversial topic, which may be under dispute. Please read this talk page and discuss substantial changes here before making them. Make sure you supply full citations when adding information to highly controversial articles. |
 |
This discussion page may contain trolling. Before you post any reply, consider how you might minimize the effects of trollish comments. Simply ignoring certain comments may be the best option. If you must respond, a temperate response is always best, whether trolling is suspected or not. |
 Archives |
|---|
[edit] CIA will morally and physically kill this guy in a set-up accident
CIA does not like people having independent ideas.
172.197.20.68 (talk • contribs) (the ipt.aol.com anon; this machine may be geolocated near Rowland Heights, CA)
- Delete this page... too much confusion!!!
- 83.237.51.89 (talk • contribs) (the mtu-net.ru anon; geolocated near Moscow)
Not to belittle whoever wrote the comment, but I don't think anyone's works not turning up at a university library is any indication of whether or not they are well known or accepted. For example, I just did a quick check at our university, and it doesn't have Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, and I wonder how many people truly would not have heard of that work.
Oh, and I just thought of something as well. Not directly relevant, but it was just something that came to mind, perhaps fear of comments like those expressed on this talk page was one of the reasons why Fermat believed that anything he wrote of any interest to anyone else should have been torn up.
Also, I would like the point out the irony in
-
- Okay. But the text you were editing was still part of my message, and was described therein as the text I'd removed. If you changed it, it would no longer have been the text I'd removed, and so my message would have become false. You see my logic, yes? :) -- Oliver P. 10:18 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)
as we are talking about an individual (FS) who supposed worked in the field of fuzzy logic.
And lastly, as lots of people seem to read this page. I would like to plug Galois. Who has not nearly enough written about him.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.243.220.22 (talk • contribs).
[edit] Mergers
I have just merged a number of stubs with this article, by pasting them into new sections. Cleanup and neutralization is still needed. See User:Smarandache fan for long-standing problems involving self-promotion by Smarandache at WP. ---CH 06:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- The guy who merged this article with stubs might be a suck-puppet or I am wrong?
- Let's vote for delletion.I vote yes.
- Yosuf
- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 222.124.251.90 (talk • contribs). (PT. TELEKOMUNIKASI INDONESIA in Jakarta)
222.124.251.90, I am the "guy" who carried out the merger, as you can see from the signed comment above and also from the history page. AFAIK, no-one else has ever suggested that I am a sockpuppet of Smarandache or anyone else, and I probably shouldn't dignify this with a response, but just for the record: no, I am not a sockpuppet for any user.
As for the proposal to delete the article, there is a definite process for proposing deletion. Speaking as an experienced Wikipedian, I actually would not support that, even though I don't think Smarandache's "achievements" make him notable. The reason is that someone (apparently FS himself) has spammed stuff about Smarandache into many places in the WP, and we would need to remove all of that. Otherwise removing this article would leave WP readers wondering if FS stuff they encounter elsewhere in WP (or elsewhere on the web) is legitimate with no recourse but doing their own research.---CH 18:00, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Smarandache hypothesis"?
WHere did this "Smarandache hypothesis" come from? Among other things, it directly contradicts the no-communication theorem.--CSTAR 07:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
- Smarandache seems to enjoy "spoofing" both art and science/math. I think we have here an American (Balkan?) counterpart of the Bogdanov affair---CH 02:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- I don't know. I don't think Smarandache matches the panache of the Bogdanovs. I located the reference for Smarandache hypothesis. Pretty uninspiring. --CSTAR 02:53, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Why all this mess ?"
Smarandache seems to be a crank with a PhD. Why is there so many noise about him ? How did he got famous ? Has he any important, contributions to mathematics (it seems that loops are attributed to him) ? It appears to me that he mostly defined new terms without taking time to [b]prove[/b] anything of interest ! (And this is crankish mathematics unfortunately)
--Maks
213.76.103.102 13:30, 8 June 2006 (UTC) (the cvx.ppp.tpnet.pl anon near Warsaw)
- "How did he get famous?" He's not famous. If you mean: "how did he get a WP bio?" that most likely answer is that he wrote it himself. Welcome to Wikipedia, the on-line encyclopedia that anyone can edit :-/
- ---CH 08:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
- But seriously, a few years ago, Smarandache seems to have gone on a self-promotion rampage, in which he apparently created many articles here about his own alleged achievements (many of his claims are quite bizzare), and he also spammed various other publically editable forums. The goal seems to have been to perpetrate some kind of massive hoax as a kind of performance art. Not the kind of thing one would expect from a university professor, but given how many university professors there are in the world, it's not surprising that some of them behave pretty oddly at times. ---CH 08:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] ICM Berkeley 1986
The head of mathematics at Increst in 1986 was Ceaucescu's daughter Zoia and only one official representative, now living in the USA, was allowed to attend the ICM in Berkeley. At that time there was a general veto on foreign trips for all Roumanian mathematicians. It seems quite unlikely that Smarandache, a mathematical non-entity, would have ever been seriously considered for a visa. --Mathsci 11:47, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unfortunately undocumented and very biased
It happened that I read this site wich is unfortunately abondant in undocumented and biased ideas; (1) allexperts.com has nothing to do with Smarandache, please ckeck it; (2) neither addall.com, there is unfortunately much exageration; (3) American Res. Press is neither a vanity press, I published myself a book and did not paid anything neither is it related to smarandache, this is just a specualtion; (4) International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics is a printed journal, not online and reviewed by important indexing journals; (5) Progress is Physics is not a crank journal since many university professors and researchers from famous institutions contributed to it, yet it accepts alternative physics; (5) I see no justification of citing S. Crothers's letter herein since it is out of subject; (6) a negative citation was included in the page to a book review but none from hundreds of positive book reviews, hence unfortunately it is biased; (7) what's wrong if some people wrote about or contributed with FS? why they can or may write about others but are prohibited to write about some; (8) I saw so many other biographies of people I never heard and I did not see any accomplishment and I wondered how they got in wikipedia. I hope you don't delete this comment because it reveals some incorect information, don't say i am smarandache or any fun since i dared to tell the truth. Sure you're free to write anything, but the truth should not be supressed. Charlie
- I removed undocumented info according with the above remarks.
- I observed that all positive info about Smarandache is deleted, for example my previous comments.
- The website of Americ. Research Press in broken, so I deleted the last link.
- It is false that Smarandache published only in one publishing house, he did in about 30, so I mentioned them in the page in order to eliminate any confusion and for the sake of the truth as it is sad above.
- The big confusion was that American Press was his DISTRIBUTOR not publisher in US, please see his Romanian books, all of them were published of course in Romania not in America.
- I added the fact that many of Smarandache's 75 book have been positively reviewed, I read good reviews in Romanian journals. Sure, I understand you don't speak Romanian. I did that since somebody added a negative quatation only, but no positive one according to NPOV.
- FYI Progress in Physics is a printed journal and EBSCO, Mumbai Nuclear Center, CERN subscribe and receive it according to the editor in Chief. It is also peer-reveiewed. I deleted the passage on Mr. Crothers since it is not the case. If somebody hates him as well, that person may start another hatred page now about Mr. C., but I hope not.
- I left negative things: about leaving his country, about blacklistings - but here also it was a mistake in the previous version since many of Smarandache's papers and books have been reveiewed by Mathematical reviews, if you do a search you see that, but not all of them have been reviewed, so I fixed that add "not all of them" have been reviewed.
- I left Smarandache functions although it is not his most important creation, it is a marginal one. In science it happens that more people independtly discover the same thing. For example, Stefan Odobleja invented cybernetics before Norbert Wiener, so please write that in Wiener's page too.
- I agree with you that he is an incomod person that argues with everybody even with his friends, but we have to evaluate his imense oeuvre.
- Since it is too much hatred and defamation in this page it is very hard to fix everything.
Marian from Craiova
-
- I checked all the articles listed by Mathematical Reviews and verified the statement I made. Only joint articles on mathematical economics and statistics seem to have been reviewed (as opposed to just listed) Progress in Physics has published a number of papers by authors blacklisted by the Cornell Archive, for example Carlos Castro and Mr. Crothers. These authors have themselves placed testimonies on the web concerning their blacklisting. I do not understand the term "alternative physics" that you have used. Why have you used this term and how does "alternative physics" differ from physics? --Mathsci 13:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] AGAINST BLACKLISTING
I am a contributor to the Progress in Physics journal and I read about this journal in this page but I completely disagree with people who undocumentedly try to blame it. It is listed and reviewed by DOAJ at Lund University, Sweden, http://www.doaj.org/ as well. Its editor in chief wrote a letter about the freedom of science. This journal was started because many scientists, including a Nobel laureate! Brian Josephson (1973), were blacklisted by arXiv, AMS, “Mathematical Reviews,” etc. Their articles and books were deleted from arXiv, not reviewed if published, not even listed, etc.
I answer for 'alternative physics' which means to allow criticism to the main stream physics ideas and to also allow ideas, theories different from the main stream ones and to allow new interpretations, etc. to be exposed, which I find normal for the seek of the science freedom. Sure, everything has to be justified, proven, motivated.
As you know many theories in theoretical physics are not proven, even main stream’s theories, even string’s theory is not proven. But some people got high positions in government, in scientific grants (NSF, Sloan foundation, etc.), administration, etc. and they suppress ideas different from theirs. If you criticize string theory or relativity theory you’re blacklisted and anything you produce is prohibited, blamed, not reviewed, rejected by publications, your job applications rejected, etc. Is that correct? I say no. Sure, now the censorship is more refined, complex, using other pretexts to defaming someone, to stigmatize some one as crank because of thinking differently or because people being jealous on his/her work, etc. Phrase as “it is probably” used by somebody before herein shows SPECULATION, this should not occur.
Blacklisting should NOT occur in a so called democratic country as America, specially against scientists because they have different ideas.
Florentine has 79 articles and books in arXiv http://xxx.lanl.gov/multi?group=math&%2Ffind=Search but not allowed to the write subject classification except those of Artificial Intelligence.
There are articles/books of his reviewed by AMS, but, of course, not all of them. AMS in my opinion is biased Being reviewed or not by some journal does not mean much, since many journals or databases are biased or have sympathies or antipathies for some people or directions of research.
He has 86 articles/books cited and many reviewed in Zentralblatt fur Mathematics in Germany: http://zb.msri.org/ZMATH/ and 250 articles/books about his work (do a search for Title: Smarandache). Do the same search in AMS database: 362 articles/books, thus many people were interested in his work. Sure some people may like, others may not like, and the third category would not care (actually this is just his neutrosophic logic based on three components). But is it somebody liked by anyone? I dough it.
Also reviewed by Referativnyi Zhurnal (Russia), Indian Science Abstracts, etc.
Look at this page, an unknown Romanian writer, but she is okay in wikipedia because she maybe has some wikipedian friends or she put this entry herself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elena_Liliana_Popescu while against this man there is a lot of insults, false accusations, biased ideas, positive things on him are deleted, unrepresentative work mentioned, mystified truth; some of his enemies herein were really MASTERS OF DECEPTION. His most representative work is in algebraic structures, non-euclidean geometry, multiple-valued logic, and specially information fusion (Marian mentioned that FS was invited and sponsored to lecture at the University of Berkeley, NASA and NATO, but this was deleted; I did a search on NASA Smarandache and then NATO Smarandache; plz don’t say those sites were written by Florentine himself as his enemies say about anything positive on him since he has no access to NASA or NATO sites).
As I read before that positive contributions are deleted plz be fear and keep my contribution too, since you can verify it by going to those sites. But if this is an encyclopedia of slandering as I heard in the news about somebody being falsely accused in wikipedia of having assassinated Kennedy, then sure you can write that Snarandache asassinated whoever you want. An open encyclopedia is good, everybody can contribute, but the side effect is that enemies of a person can easily slander that person too. Hence accusations should be proven. Allan-29 September 2006
- I think it is intellectually lazy to write that Mathematical Reviews of the AMS is biased. The reviewers are mathematicians from all over the world who give their services without being paid. Mathematical Reviews is an extremely useful resource, particularly now that it is available to subscribers on the web as mathscinet. The impression given by mathscinet is that Florentin Smarandache's mathematical contributions are minor and marginal. From private enquiries, he does not seem to be known to top Roumanian mathematicians formerly in INCREST. Thus it seems that what is in doubt are the "facts" presented in the wikipedia article rather than the credibility of Mathematical Reviews. If we are to believe the wikipedia article, Smarandache is one of the most creative mathematicians in the world: why then is he at a Community College in New Mexico? As for the journal "Progress in Physics", despite the fact that a printed version is available, many major universities do not subscribe to this journal. With editors or authors like Stephen J Crothers and Carlos Castro, who from their own websites seem to be black-listed fringe physicists, this is not entirely surprising. --81.101.143.112 08:55, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Western boycott against Third Word countries and Muslim mathematicians
-
- Reading this page I acknowledge that Mathematical Reviews, AMS, ISI are the most discriminatory and biased "scientific" organizations in the world.
What User 81.101.143.112 misses is that many articles and books ARE SIMPLY NOT SENT by Mathematical Reviews to be reviewed to the mathematicians all over the world. Not only Smarandace is blacklisted but many others who do not follow American or Western research directions or dare to critize these research directions are also blacklisted and boycotted and slandered, or people belonging to countries not liked by Westerners (Muslim countries, Third World countries which are depreaciated by developed countries, etc.). Look at the constant insult done against Muslim prophet Mohammad by Westerners under so called "freedom of speach," but this actually "freedom of insult"! So, no surprize that Smarandace is insulted and falsy accused.
-
-
- The anonymous comments above are unsupported and I believe quite untrue. A wikipedia biography cannot be based on wild conspiracy theories. It must be based on verifiable sources within the public domain. Besides, in this case most of Smarandache's contributions in pure mathematics are listed in Mathematical Reviews without comment, so there is no suggestion of censorship. I think the mathematical establishment is careful to avoid bias on the basis of race or religion. For example the next International Congress of Mathematicians will be held in 2010 in India, which is often described as a developing country. 81.101.143.112 07:31, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] This article is unassessed
The links to Mr. Smarandache's "artistic work" point only to obscure web-sites generally hosting weak artistic attempts. I think that this does not suffice for one to be called "philosopher" or "poet" (I invite the Romanian language speakers here to read his sparkling volume of poetry). Some of my former high school peers have published more mature texts (in real books, that is), and they didn't transform into bragsters creating their own Wikipedia page.
I suggest to Mr. Smarandache to stop with this non-sense and better focus on the area that he is best suited for. Azotlichid 12:17, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
- A poet is one who writes poems. Smarandache is a published poet. WP:OR requires that we don't give our own opinions on the quality of poetry, but instead reference published reviews.--Prosfilaes 11:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
