Hi ChuckHG, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for joining the coolest online encyclopedia I know of. I hope you stick around. You'll probably find it easiest to start with a tutorial of how the wikipedia works, and you can test stuff for yourself in the sandbox. Check out the simplified ruleset. When you're contributing, you'll probably find the manual of style to be helpful, and you'll also want to remember a couple important guidelines.
Those are probably the most important ones, and you can take a look at some others at the policies and guidelines page. You might also be interested in how to write a great article and possibly adding some images to your articles.
Be sure to get involved in the community – you can contact me on my talk page if you have any questions, and you can check out the village pump, where lots of wikipedians hang out and discuss things. If you're looking for something to do, check out the community portal. And whenever you ask a question or post something on a talk page, be sure to sign your name by typing 4 tildes like ~~~~. Always sign the talk page, never the articles.
Again, welcome! It's great to have you. Happy editing!--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 14:24, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Hi, nice edits so far! I noticed you have edited the knot theory page, adding refs for some of the results I stated. Thanks. Anyway, your comment about the Smith Conjecture piqued my interest, since I've been meaning a long time to work on such an article. I don't have time for that (it's liable to be too big a project for me now), but certainly it would be very good if you wanted to write such an article :-) You may be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mathematics/Current_activity which is a very useful page. -- C S (Talk) 00:08, 16 December 2005
(UTC)
Hello, I have undone a couple of your revisions to the Monty Hall/Bayes Theorem secction. Please see the talk page for an explanation, and reply there if needed. The Glopk 16:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello Chuck. Many thanks for the very interesting addon to my article on a Pythagorean Triple which approximates 30,60,90 triangle. Neil Parker 08:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello, lets collaborate then, you reverted the DNA and the Braid pictures from the Knot Theory article. In mathematics, braid theory is a special field of knot theory. So both graphs are prevalent in the article, correct? Just I am letting you know before I proceed to revert your reversions, well this is another way of describing the recursive nature of our knotting dilemma. Let me know, I want to learn from your views. (In mi minor please) thanks. John Manuel-23:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
John Manuel-14:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
On the subject of my William Byrd article, I realise of course that it does not contain the formatting characteristic of a Wikipedia article. I wrote it in the hope that somebody else from the editorial team might supply it. I'm afraid my criticisms of the original article still stand. It is way out of date and unbalanced, leaving out essential information. I would content that my substitution represents a necessary step in the right direction, though I agree that more work is needed. Since Byrd is remembered today as a composer, it does not seem to me 'unbalanced' to devote a substantial part of the article to a discussion of the music.
David
—Preceding unsigned comment added by D Humphreys ( talk • contribs)
Template:CiteCat has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -—
Gadget850 (Ed)
talk 19:22, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi ChuckHG, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for joining the coolest online encyclopedia I know of. I hope you stick around. You'll probably find it easiest to start with a tutorial of how the wikipedia works, and you can test stuff for yourself in the sandbox. Check out the simplified ruleset. When you're contributing, you'll probably find the manual of style to be helpful, and you'll also want to remember a couple important guidelines.
Those are probably the most important ones, and you can take a look at some others at the policies and guidelines page. You might also be interested in how to write a great article and possibly adding some images to your articles.
Be sure to get involved in the community – you can contact me on my talk page if you have any questions, and you can check out the village pump, where lots of wikipedians hang out and discuss things. If you're looking for something to do, check out the community portal. And whenever you ask a question or post something on a talk page, be sure to sign your name by typing 4 tildes like ~~~~. Always sign the talk page, never the articles.
Again, welcome! It's great to have you. Happy editing!--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 14:24, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Hi, nice edits so far! I noticed you have edited the knot theory page, adding refs for some of the results I stated. Thanks. Anyway, your comment about the Smith Conjecture piqued my interest, since I've been meaning a long time to work on such an article. I don't have time for that (it's liable to be too big a project for me now), but certainly it would be very good if you wanted to write such an article :-) You may be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mathematics/Current_activity which is a very useful page. -- C S (Talk) 00:08, 16 December 2005
(UTC)
Hello, I have undone a couple of your revisions to the Monty Hall/Bayes Theorem secction. Please see the talk page for an explanation, and reply there if needed. The Glopk 16:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello Chuck. Many thanks for the very interesting addon to my article on a Pythagorean Triple which approximates 30,60,90 triangle. Neil Parker 08:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello, lets collaborate then, you reverted the DNA and the Braid pictures from the Knot Theory article. In mathematics, braid theory is a special field of knot theory. So both graphs are prevalent in the article, correct? Just I am letting you know before I proceed to revert your reversions, well this is another way of describing the recursive nature of our knotting dilemma. Let me know, I want to learn from your views. (In mi minor please) thanks. John Manuel-23:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
John Manuel-14:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
On the subject of my William Byrd article, I realise of course that it does not contain the formatting characteristic of a Wikipedia article. I wrote it in the hope that somebody else from the editorial team might supply it. I'm afraid my criticisms of the original article still stand. It is way out of date and unbalanced, leaving out essential information. I would content that my substitution represents a necessary step in the right direction, though I agree that more work is needed. Since Byrd is remembered today as a composer, it does not seem to me 'unbalanced' to devote a substantial part of the article to a discussion of the music.
David
—Preceding unsigned comment added by D Humphreys ( talk • contribs)
Template:CiteCat has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at
the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. -—
Gadget850 (Ed)
talk 19:22, 24 May 2010 (UTC)