User talk:Stefan.karpinski

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

• To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
• Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
• If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
• Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
• Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 22:52, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of List of most interesting Wikipedia pages

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on List of most interesting Wikipedia pages requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you.  Chzz  ►  21:50, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but an article on "interesting Wikipedia pages" is just not appropriate, for several reasons; it isn't a notable topic, it can't be neutral (because it is a matter of opinion), and it is too self-referential.

We do, however, have pages like that in "Wikipedia:" namespace. We've already got Wikipedia:List of unusual articles.  Chzz  ►  21:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Julia promotion strategy

Hi, you don't know me, but I'm a huge Julia fan, something like twice your age, and although I really appreciate your work on its article here, it's doing nothing for your visibility compared to your 0.1 release.

Right now, if you want press and exposure, the language to beat with completely undeserved mystique among the masses is R, partly because "big data" (in the old days we called it "statistics") is hot on the venture markets as companies try to figure out how they can optimize and data mine. So you've got to use that. And it's so easy: R is a sitting duck because it has so many decades of legacy, it's one of the most ugly, incomprehensible languages around, at Perl-levels of unreadability but it's hard to write, too. And dog-slow compared to Julia.

So, here's what you do: Make a series of ten blog posts, about one per week, on a theme e.g. "R versus Julia: Big data speed and comprehensibility shoot out" ("bake off" is a trademark, so go for the gun metaphor, the press eats it up, sadly.) Each post should take less than an hour: take a common statistical operation, show what it looks like in R and Julia code, run it on some god forsakenly large data set, and show the benchmarks in a big simple graph at the end of the post with some bullet holes photoshopped in on the much larger R graph bar. Then submit each post to Y-Combinator Hacker News, Slashdot, Ars Technica, and anywhere else that publishes that sort of thing.

If that doesn't get your article page views up 10x or more, your money back. Seriously, please do this. I don't want to live in a 0-based index future, and you're the last best hope to save us from borghood. 168.103.94.19 (talk) 20:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello, Stefan.karpinski. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Julia (programming language), you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Yworo (talk) 22:47, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Yworo. As you note, I'm clearly one of the Julia language creators – hiding my identity when making edits to the language page would definitely be wrong and against policy. In general, I have tried to only make edits to the Julia page to correct factual errors. I think the upshot of the most recent back-and-forth edits (with a user in the 94.106 IP block) is that the relationship between Julia's language features and those of other Lisp-family systems like Common Lisp and Dylan is much more clearly stated in a way that's quite even-handed. In any case, thanks for the warning about conflict of interest. I will definitely exercise caution. Stefan Karpinski (talk) 17:36, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't see you doing anything wrong. Just a formality. Yworo (talk) 17:38, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Stefan.karpinski. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Stefan Karpinski, 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, clients, 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 Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
• 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. Thank you. Kj cheetham (talk) 13:27, 11 February 2023 (UTC)