Wikipedia

User:Blablubbs/Wolfram

< User:Blablubbs

Break 1

edit
Done by multiple editors. --Blablubbs|talk 17:42, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Break 2

edit
Done. --Blablubbs|talk 23:40, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Break 3

edit
Done. --Blablubbs|talk 00:57, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Break 4

edit
Done, by multiple users —XOR'easter (talk) 07:32, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Break 5

edit
Done. --Blablubbs|talk 14:31, 13 March 2021 (UTC) and others

Break 6

edit
Done. --Blablubbs|talk 01:27, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Break 7

edit
Done, multiple users 15:23, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Break 8

edit
Done by multiple editors. --Blablubbs|talk 17:30, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Break 9

edit
Done. --Blablubbs|talk 14:50, 13 March 2021 (UTC) and others

Break 10

edit

Break 11

edit
Done. mfb (talk) 12:43, 13 March 2021 (UTC) and others

Break 12

edit
Done, by multiple users. —XOR'easter (talk) 18:28, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Break 13

edit
Done, by multiple users. —XOR'easter (talk) 19:32, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Specific addition appears to have been reverted, so struck. Blablubbs|talk 18:02, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Break 14

edit
Done, by multiple users —XOR'easter (talk) 07:38, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Break 15

edit
Done by JayBeeEll. --Blablubbs|talk 01:38, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Edits needing 2O

edit
  • Richard Crandall: 1, 2 partially removed.   Not sure. about the other edit
  • Context-free language: 1   Not sure.
    • This is textbook material and should be replaced by a textbook reference, rather than NKS. Unfortunately it's a little awkward for me to look these up right now because my copies of the textbooks are in my office and I'm not. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:41, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Done

edit
  • Karnaugh map: 1 - edit is still alive, potentially useful but could get a better source   Not sure.
  • D. H. Lehmer: 1   Not sure. Edit is productive at face value, dunno about appropriateness of the source in this context.
    • Removed as part of a more general overhaul. XOR'easter (talk) 20:28, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • René Thom: 1   Not sure. Is this a legitimate addition?
    • Removed. I think the characterization of catastrophe theory as being limited to biology is a mistake, and in general Wolfram is not a good source for the history of mathematics. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:33, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Émile Borel: 1, 2   Not sure.
  • John von Neumann: 1, 2, 3 EL   Removed,   Not sure. wrt [1]
    • Removed as NKS is unreliable history. XOR'easter (talk) 18:35, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Lambda calculus: 1, 2, 3   Not sure.
    First diff is legit, other two were spam and had already been reverted. Tercer (talk) 20:31, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Philosophical logic: 1, 2, 3   Not sure. Cites Wolfram, but reputable publisher.
    That's Sybil Wolfram, his mother. Probably a bit promotional, but I'd leave it be since it's a reputable publisher. Tercer (talk) 20:36, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Pure function: 1, 2, 3   Not sure. if the Mathematica code is appropriate in this context
    I removed it early in this cleanup before seeing this comment. I think the removal was appropriate. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Statistics: 1, 2, 3 looks okay-ish.   Not sure. about Special:Diff/834066276
  • Turing machine: 1, 2, 3 link   Removed,   Not sure. about the text additions
    • Text mostly removed, and the remainder rewritten a bit [2]. XOR'easter (talk) 19:03, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Feigenbaum constants: 1, 2, 3, 4 partially   Removed, but   Not sure. Review by subject-matter expert appreciated
    • The remaining spam was just the biographical tidbit that Feigenbaum shared his discovery in talks before publishing, which is an absolutely unremarkable statement. Removed. XOR'easter (talk) 18:52, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Euler spiral: 1, 2, 3, 4   Not sure. if appropriate, full diff here.   Done Removed entire code farm including but not limited to the Wolfram parts. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:05, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Transfinite number: 1   Done Removed section. NKS is a bad source for any historical claim, books more specifically about the math exist, and the writing wasn't good enough to salvage. XOR'easter (talk) 17:32, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Boolean network: 1   Not sure. Removed for being unclearly written and inserted in a bad place, in addition to advertising NKS. XOR'easter (talk) 18:46, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • John Adams (physicist): 1 - major expansion of article   Not sure. Looks OK, spam-wise, though not particularly well-written. XOR'easter (talk) 18:43, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Hermann Grassmann: 1   Done Removed for crimes of vagueness and relying on NKS for history. XOR'easter (talk) 17:36, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Paul Dirac: 1   Not sure. the edit adds an image; the file was uploaded to commons by the same sock-farm and links back to Wolfram. So the spam here is second-order. What do we think? (A number of other superficially non-spammy image additions are similar.)
    I think the image didn't add anything to the article. Someone reverted the edit a week ago so I'll mark this as done. --mfb (talk) 14:34, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
    Thanks, I should have noticed it was immediately reverted! --JBL (talk) 15:36, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Cambridge North railway station: 1, 2   Not sure. Substantial change relating to Wolfram, ref isn't Wolfram site
    See Rule 30 (in break 1). It was supposed to be Game of Life but ended up being Rule 30. Should be fine as it is. --mfb (talk) 14:37, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
    I agree, this one is ok. The added source is reliable enough and independent of Wolfram, and the added text saying that the rule they added was first studied by Wolfram not Conway is correct and relevant. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:00, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Mechanical equilibrium: 1   Not sure. Bunch of diagrams again
    It's legit, diagrams are good and pertinent. Tercer (talk) 20:10, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Critique of Judgment: 1   Not sure. About reliability and appropriateness here
    • Replaced with a citation to a Kant scholar. XOR'easter (talk) 19:52, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Mary Cartwright: 1   Not sure. Wolfram ref, dunno if appropriate.
  • Removed on second thought and per XOR's assertion that NKS isn't a valid source for historical facts. Blablubbs|talk 01:43, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Diffusion-limited aggregation: 1, 2, 3   Not sure. about [3]
  • Deep learning: 1   Not sure. Since partly rewritten, dunno if appropriate.
    The link to Stephen Wolfram is misplaced for sure. A link to the project itself cannot be used as reference that it "publicized these improvements", as that would need an independent source. I think we can safely remove this. --mfb (talk) 02:22, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
    Removed per above. Blablubbs|talk 17:09, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Data compression: 1, 2, 3, 4 partially   Removed,   Not sure. about the text additions
    Looks like this was already removed and I missed it somehow. Blablubbs|talk 17:18, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Sonification: 1, 2, 3   Not sure. if due
  • Indiscriminate list   Removed upon further review. Blablubbs|talk 17:21, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Essentially done, striking and moving. Blablubbs|talk 17:23, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • History of the graphical user interface: 1   Not sure.
    Reviewed again, removed the mention of Wolfram software and left the rest (Special:Diff/1012110262). Blablubbs|talk 17:28, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • List of pioneers in computer science: 1   Not sure. P. 1107 again, dunno if appropriate
    Reviewed again and   Removed Blablubbs|talk 17:30, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • List of computer algebra systems: 1 Likely ok, but:   Not sure.
    It's fine. Not particularly relevant, but it's just an entry in a list. Tercer (talk) 18:48, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Berni Alder: 1, 2, 3   Not sure.
    That's way too much detail, and NKS is not a reliable source anyway. Removed. Tercer (talk) 23:12, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Microsoft Math Solver: 1 probably(?) ok, but not familiar with the software so   Not sure.
    The software is related, and it's just a See Also, so live and let live. Tercer (talk) 23:15, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Document processor: 1   Not sure. Appropriate?
    • Not sure the article needs to exist, honestly. Apart from the LyX documentation calling LyX itself a "document processor", the term doesn't appear to be established as meaning what the stub says it means. XOR'easter (talk) 22:13, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Amazon Alexa: 1, 2, 3 Is   Not sure. this actually due? Guessing no, but not familiar enough with the product
    • I cleaned up some of the language. Alexa does query Wolfram Alpha for some science and math queries but removed references to Wolfram Language powering Alexa. That is a total fabrication. I also added additional knowledge sources Alexa queries for context. Montesquieu1789 (talk) 23:29, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
      • ​Saw that, thanks. Closing this one. Blablubbs|talk 23:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Closely connected articles that need special attention

edit
  • Stephen Wolfram: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 tagged {{UDP}}
    • First attempt at de-promotionalization made. XOR'easter (talk) 21:35, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
      • Cleaned up, tag removed by Thjarkur Blablubbs|talk 10:17, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
  • WolframAlpha: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 tagged {{UDP}}
    • First check done. A lot of these edits were just tweaking the Alexa rank in the infobox, but some of them added bad text (e.g., verbatim copying from a newspaper). XOR'easter (talk) 23:42, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Wolfram Language: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 tagged {{UDP}}
    • First check done. Even the material that wasn't added by known socks is very reliant on primary sources. XOR'easter (talk) 16:28, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Wolfram Mathematica: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 tagged {{UDP}}
    • The worst of it seems to be the "Features" list, which is an indiscriminate collection heavily worked over by the sock farm. The given sources don't indicate why the listed features are the significant ones worth talking about. Plus, there's the whole "prefer prose over lists" thing — it just looks lazy. And at least some of it is copyvio (unsurprisingly). XOR'easter (talk) 17:42, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
      Is it a copyright violation if it was added by Wolfram or on behalf of Wolfram? scnr --mfb (talk) 04:22, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
      • Cleaned up, tag removed by Thjarkur. Blablubbs|talk 10:17, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Wolfram Research: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 tagged {{UDP}}
  • Wolfram SystemModeler: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 tagged {{UDP}}
  • A New Kind of Science: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 tagged {{UDP}}
    • I took a first whack at this, but my weekend is almost over and I don't know when I'll be able to get back to it. The section on "Wolfram Summer School" still reads as very ... advertorial. XOR'easter (talk) 23:16, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
      • That section has now been removed by David Eppstein. The remaining text, particularly the lengthy "Contents" section, has POV and potentially OR issues, indulging in vagaries (e.g., In a sense, many of Wolfram's ideas are based on understanding the scientific process—including the human mind—as operating within the same universe it studies, rather than being outside it). But it's possible that the specific issue of undisclosed paid editing (by this identified group) has been adequately addressed. XOR'easter (talk) 18:33, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Wolfram Player: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 tagged {{UDP}}; created by the farm
    I have attempted speedy deletion, let's see what happens. --JBL (talk) 20:45, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
    Gone. --mfb (talk) 01:12, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Wolfram Physics Project: 1, 2, 3, 4 — article originally created by a now-blocked sock, raising the question of whether we actually need it
    Gone. Blablubbs|talk 00:18, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Now prodded by JBL, I tagged {{UDP}} and endorsed the prod for good measure. Recommend AFD if it doesn't go through. --Blablubbs|talk 15:28, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
  • I co-endorsed the prod. In case it goes to AfD and I'm not around, feel free to quote my rationale, I guess. XOR'easter (talk) 20:05, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Blablubbs/Wolfram&oldid=1019634316"