I am writing a page on inductive inference, which I have put on a sub page.
This is largely for my own benefit. It is an interest of mine.
There is an existing page on Inductive Inference which is fairly brief.
My page is more explanatory and covers roughly the first 3 paragraphs of that section.
Also I have done the maths as text, which works alright because the maths is not difficult.
However I dont have references (other than to other wiki pages). Honestly I find it difficult to read scholarly articles. I am not an academic.
So maybe my page is not useful to anyone else. Thats OK.
Hi. I feel you have something original to say. However, Wikipedia cannot accept original ideas. Not even too original presentation of well-known ideas. If you'll feel you do not fit here, maybe try a different place. Happy editing, -- Boris Tsirelson ( talk) 19:41, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
OK thanks for that. I agree. The wikki must be based on reliable referenced work.
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 22:55, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi there,
People (me included) keep stumbling on that article and saying it is not a paradox, so please take a look at my comment to your opinion on the paradox. Thanks. JMCF125 ( discussion • contribs) 15:07, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Great work on Lambda calculus. Bearian ( talk) 17:08, 10 October 2013 (UTC) |
Anyway I have no complaints. There were mistakes in what I did back then.
It is disappointing to me that the Lambda Calculus page is such a mess now. They haven't even tidied up the notation. I just wish someone would get in there and tidy it up.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lambda lifting may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 07:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lambda lifting may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 13:45, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Church encoding, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Value ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your message I will fix the problem. Thepigdog ( talk) 10:31, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for using VisualEditor! Having editors use it is the best way for the Wikimedia Foundation to develop it into the best tool it can be.
While we always welcome general feedback (please report any issues in Bugzilla in the "VisualEditor" product or drop your feedback on the central feedback page on MediaWiki.org), the developers are especially interested right now in feedback on the special character inserter. This new tool is used for inserting special characters (including symbols like ₥, IPA pronunciation symbols, mathematics symbols, and characters with diacritics). It is intended to help people whose computers do not have good character inserters. For example, many Mac users prefer to use the extensive "Special Characters..." tool present at the bottom of the Edit menu in all applications or to learn the keyboard shortcuts for characters like ñ and ü.
The current version of the special characters tool in VisualEditor is very simple and very basic. It will be getting a lot of work in the coming weeks and months. It does not contain very many character sets at this time. (The specific character sets can be customized at each Wikipedia, so that each project could have a local version with the characters it wants.) But the developers want your ideas at this early stage about ways that the overall concept could be improved. I would appreciate your input on this question, so please try out the character inserter and tell me what changes to the design would (or would not!) best work for you.
Issues you might consider:
The developers are open to any thoughts on how the special character inserter can best be developed, even if this requires significant changes. Please leave your views on the central feedback page, or, if you'd prefer, you can contact me directly on my talk page. It would be really helpful if you can tell me how frequently you need to use special characters in your typical editing and what languages or other special characters are important to you.
Thank you again for your work with VisualEditor and for any feedback you can provide. I really do appreciate it.
P.S. You might be interested in the current ideas about improving citations, too. Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 00:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Deductive lambda calculus may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 04:35, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Deductive lambda calculus may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 02:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Deductive lambda calculus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Division ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Destynova ( talk) 13:15, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Let expression may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:59, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Narrowing of algebraic value sets, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Monads ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:29, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Track roller assembly.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate
copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{
PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{
self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}}
(to require that you be credited), or any tag
here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- MifterBot ( Talk • Contribs • Owner) 10:45, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
I've rolled-back your addition to religion. It was unsourced, and more a polemical point of view that encyclopedic information. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 13:41, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Inductive probability may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 02:59, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Inductive probability may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 05:14, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Inductive probability, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boolean. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:07, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Relational programming may have broken the syntax by modifying 3 "()"s and 9 "[]"s and 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 10:01, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Deductive lambda calculus may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 07:53, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Inductive probability, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vision. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 16:05, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
14:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Thepigdog. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Thepigdog. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in and edits about COVID-19. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Johnuniq ( talk) 10:53, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 11:44, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I see you have already received the discretionary sanction alerts for both COVID and biographies on living people. You are aware that editors in this area are expected to be held to a higher standard when it comes to following the guidelines and policies of Wikipedia. Those who do not meet these standards can be met with sanctions ranging from blocks to topic bans from the subject.
I wanted to make sure you were aware of the standards for sourcing that we apply in medical subjects. Please review Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and stick to those standards when sourcing medical claims. Take particular care when using sources to make statements about living people.
I also want to be sure you are aware of our biographies of living people policy which covers negative comments about living people anywhere on wikipedia. Your recent discussion at Talk:Investigations into the origin of COVID-19 fell short of these standards and has been removed accordingly.
Further failures in regards to these standards may result in sanctions. Thank you. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 23:34, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
This is what I have heard.
I imagine this will all come out into the mainstream in the end. Perhaps too little, too late. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thepigdog ( talk • contribs) 11:54, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 12:54, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Please do not add unreferenced or
poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about
living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to
Talk:Ivermectin. It is not a good idea to
soapbox about whether or not "a group of scientists worked together to create a paper they did not actually believe
" on an article that has nothing to do with A) that paper, B) those scientists, and C) that controversy. It also may constitute a
BLP violation, given that it was not referenced in support of a relevant content discussion.
Shibbolethink (
♔
♕)
13:55, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Here are the sources. Dispute them if you will.
From Kristian G. Andersen to e-mail to Fauci, Friday, January 21st, 2020, 10:32 PM from Fauci's e-mails, released under freedom of information.
From The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2. Published: 17 March 2020. Authors Kristian G. Andersen, Andrew Rambaut, W. Ian Lipkin, Edward C. Holmes & Robert F. Garry.
So between the 21st of March and when the paper was submitted for publication, well before the 17th of March 2020 Kristian G. Andersen completely reverses his opinion.
The relevance is that Alex only accepts evidence from reputable journals. In other words, only journals that support his viewpoint.
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Acroterion
(talk)
16:40, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Thepigdog ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Alexbrn is (Redacted). THe only way to carry the discussion forward was by challenging him. We are in the midst of discussions on the Ivermectin talk page, and you show your cowardice by blocking me. Thepigdog ( talk) 16:54, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Decline reason:
WP:NOTTHEM. Any further personal attacks will lead to your talk page access being revoked. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 16:55, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
The following topic ban now applies to you:
You are topic-banned from subjects related to Covid-19 for one year, interpreted broadly, including medications and procedures related to Covid treatment.
You have been sanctioned for personal attacks and violations of the medical subject sourcing policy.
This topic ban is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/COVID-19#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. Please read WP:TBAN to understand what a topic ban is. If you do not comply with the topic ban, you may be blocked for an extended period to enforce the ban.
If you wish to appeal the ban, please read the appeals process. You are free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Acroterion (talk) 01:15, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I sincerely thank you for your great contribution in Let expression.
Is there any reference or textbook that explains 10 rules in Let expression#Conversion from let to lambda expressions?
I really want to understand the logic behind those rules! (Especially rule 9). Sepiabrown ( talk) 19:14, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
I am writing a page on inductive inference, which I have put on a sub page.
This is largely for my own benefit. It is an interest of mine.
There is an existing page on Inductive Inference which is fairly brief.
My page is more explanatory and covers roughly the first 3 paragraphs of that section.
Also I have done the maths as text, which works alright because the maths is not difficult.
However I dont have references (other than to other wiki pages). Honestly I find it difficult to read scholarly articles. I am not an academic.
So maybe my page is not useful to anyone else. Thats OK.
Hi. I feel you have something original to say. However, Wikipedia cannot accept original ideas. Not even too original presentation of well-known ideas. If you'll feel you do not fit here, maybe try a different place. Happy editing, -- Boris Tsirelson ( talk) 19:41, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
OK thanks for that. I agree. The wikki must be based on reliable referenced work.
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. -- SineBot ( talk) 22:55, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi there,
People (me included) keep stumbling on that article and saying it is not a paradox, so please take a look at my comment to your opinion on the paradox. Thanks. JMCF125 ( discussion • contribs) 15:07, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Great work on Lambda calculus. Bearian ( talk) 17:08, 10 October 2013 (UTC) |
Anyway I have no complaints. There were mistakes in what I did back then.
It is disappointing to me that the Lambda Calculus page is such a mess now. They haven't even tidied up the notation. I just wish someone would get in there and tidy it up.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lambda lifting may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 07:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Lambda lifting may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 13:45, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Church encoding, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Value ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your message I will fix the problem. Thepigdog ( talk) 10:31, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for using VisualEditor! Having editors use it is the best way for the Wikimedia Foundation to develop it into the best tool it can be.
While we always welcome general feedback (please report any issues in Bugzilla in the "VisualEditor" product or drop your feedback on the central feedback page on MediaWiki.org), the developers are especially interested right now in feedback on the special character inserter. This new tool is used for inserting special characters (including symbols like ₥, IPA pronunciation symbols, mathematics symbols, and characters with diacritics). It is intended to help people whose computers do not have good character inserters. For example, many Mac users prefer to use the extensive "Special Characters..." tool present at the bottom of the Edit menu in all applications or to learn the keyboard shortcuts for characters like ñ and ü.
The current version of the special characters tool in VisualEditor is very simple and very basic. It will be getting a lot of work in the coming weeks and months. It does not contain very many character sets at this time. (The specific character sets can be customized at each Wikipedia, so that each project could have a local version with the characters it wants.) But the developers want your ideas at this early stage about ways that the overall concept could be improved. I would appreciate your input on this question, so please try out the character inserter and tell me what changes to the design would (or would not!) best work for you.
Issues you might consider:
The developers are open to any thoughts on how the special character inserter can best be developed, even if this requires significant changes. Please leave your views on the central feedback page, or, if you'd prefer, you can contact me directly on my talk page. It would be really helpful if you can tell me how frequently you need to use special characters in your typical editing and what languages or other special characters are important to you.
Thank you again for your work with VisualEditor and for any feedback you can provide. I really do appreciate it.
P.S. You might be interested in the current ideas about improving citations, too. Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 00:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Deductive lambda calculus may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 04:35, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Deductive lambda calculus may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 02:33, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Deductive lambda calculus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Division ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Destynova ( talk) 13:15, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Let expression may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s and 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 14:59, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Narrowing of algebraic value sets, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Monads ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:29, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
File:Track roller assembly.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate
copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{
PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{
self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}}
(to require that you be credited), or any tag
here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. -- MifterBot ( Talk • Contribs • Owner) 10:45, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
I've rolled-back your addition to religion. It was unsourced, and more a polemical point of view that encyclopedic information. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 13:41, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Inductive probability may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 02:59, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Inductive probability may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 05:14, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Inductive probability, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Boolean. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:07, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Relational programming may have broken the syntax by modifying 3 "()"s and 9 "[]"s and 1 "<>"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 10:01, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Deductive lambda calculus may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
|
---|
|
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 07:53, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Inductive probability, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vision. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 16:05, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
14:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Thepigdog. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Thepigdog. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in and edits about COVID-19. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Johnuniq ( talk) 10:53, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 11:44, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I see you have already received the discretionary sanction alerts for both COVID and biographies on living people. You are aware that editors in this area are expected to be held to a higher standard when it comes to following the guidelines and policies of Wikipedia. Those who do not meet these standards can be met with sanctions ranging from blocks to topic bans from the subject.
I wanted to make sure you were aware of the standards for sourcing that we apply in medical subjects. Please review Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and stick to those standards when sourcing medical claims. Take particular care when using sources to make statements about living people.
I also want to be sure you are aware of our biographies of living people policy which covers negative comments about living people anywhere on wikipedia. Your recent discussion at Talk:Investigations into the origin of COVID-19 fell short of these standards and has been removed accordingly.
Further failures in regards to these standards may result in sanctions. Thank you. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 23:34, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
This is what I have heard.
I imagine this will all come out into the mainstream in the end. Perhaps too little, too late. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thepigdog ( talk • contribs) 11:54, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 12:54, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Please do not add unreferenced or
poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about
living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to
Talk:Ivermectin. It is not a good idea to
soapbox about whether or not "a group of scientists worked together to create a paper they did not actually believe
" on an article that has nothing to do with A) that paper, B) those scientists, and C) that controversy. It also may constitute a
BLP violation, given that it was not referenced in support of a relevant content discussion.
Shibbolethink (
♔
♕)
13:55, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Here are the sources. Dispute them if you will.
From Kristian G. Andersen to e-mail to Fauci, Friday, January 21st, 2020, 10:32 PM from Fauci's e-mails, released under freedom of information.
From The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2. Published: 17 March 2020. Authors Kristian G. Andersen, Andrew Rambaut, W. Ian Lipkin, Edward C. Holmes & Robert F. Garry.
So between the 21st of March and when the paper was submitted for publication, well before the 17th of March 2020 Kristian G. Andersen completely reverses his opinion.
The relevance is that Alex only accepts evidence from reputable journals. In other words, only journals that support his viewpoint.
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Acroterion
(talk)
16:40, 13 July 2021 (UTC)Thepigdog ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
Alexbrn is (Redacted). THe only way to carry the discussion forward was by challenging him. We are in the midst of discussions on the Ivermectin talk page, and you show your cowardice by blocking me. Thepigdog ( talk) 16:54, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Decline reason:
WP:NOTTHEM. Any further personal attacks will lead to your talk page access being revoked. Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 16:55, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
The following topic ban now applies to you:
You are topic-banned from subjects related to Covid-19 for one year, interpreted broadly, including medications and procedures related to Covid treatment.
You have been sanctioned for personal attacks and violations of the medical subject sourcing policy.
This topic ban is imposed in my capacity as an uninvolved administrator under the authority of the Arbitration Committee's decision at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/COVID-19#Final decision and, if applicable, the procedure described at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions. This sanction has been recorded in the log of sanctions. Please read WP:TBAN to understand what a topic ban is. If you do not comply with the topic ban, you may be blocked for an extended period to enforce the ban.
If you wish to appeal the ban, please read the appeals process. You are free to contact me on my talk page if anything of the above is unclear to you. Acroterion (talk) 01:15, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I sincerely thank you for your great contribution in Let expression.
Is there any reference or textbook that explains 10 rules in Let expression#Conversion from let to lambda expressions?
I really want to understand the logic behind those rules! (Especially rule 9). Sepiabrown ( talk) 19:14, 1 April 2022 (UTC)