This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sushmita Ruj until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Laterthanyouthink ( talk) 13:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The article Prince Rupert's cube you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Prince Rupert's cube for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 19:22, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Dear Prof. Epstein, I hope all is well. I think it is possible the second review you link of this person's books is not to a book by this Mr Tausch.... but another one.: Schöneweiss, H. G. (1956). Die Lautentwicklung der Mundarten des Trièves (Dauphiné, Dép. Isère). Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Romanische Sprachwissenschaft Nr. 11. by Arno Tausch Romanische Forschungen, 68. Bd., 1./2. H., pp. 165-167 https://www.jstor.org/stable/27936524 Just letting you know in case you would like to check. Best wishes ( Msrasnw ( talk) 10:28, 11 July 2022 (UTC))
This AfD: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Łukaszyk–Karmowski_metric seems like it falls within your sphere of interest. PianoDan ( talk) 14:42, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Could you tell me what part of my edit was 'unduly negative'? I put much research time in the edit and tried to be factual. Moonrakercrystal ( talk) 17:57, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
RE: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ihor_Bohachevsky 666hopedieslast ( talk) 13:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I filed at AIV but saw that you were recently active and might be able to get to it faster: Can you please deal with this vandal? Funcrunch ( talk) 07:15, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
On 18 July 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ellaisa Marquis, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ellaisa Marquis has been called the "marquis player" of women's football in Saint Lucia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ellaisa Marquis. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Ellaisa Marquis), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:02, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Io1026 ( talk) 18:57, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meeko Oishi until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Uricdivine ( talk) 00:00, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Quadrisecant you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 20:01, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
The file File:Turan-13-4.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Unused. Superseded by File:Turan 13-4.svg.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion. --
Minorax«¦
talk¦» 13:03, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
A bit of a random request, but you're an admin and the deleting admin, Liz, has been very busy. Could you restore the deleted page The Heat Is On (TV series) and move it without redirect to Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia/The Heat Is On (TV series) for preservation at WP:HOAXLIST? (Liz indicated on her talk ( User talk:Liz#The Heat is On) that she was okay with doing that. Ovinus ( talk) 18:57, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
The article Quadrisecant you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Quadrisecant for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 19:02, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Dr. Eppstein, please explain why you object to graph theory usage, specifically on "Polytree"? There was nothing gratuitous about it, I only reflect the terms as used in graph theory. Would you be happy if I make all the terms graphically correct, or do you refuse to use "acyclic directed graph", or what? I am confused. I'm sure you know all the terminology; I do not understand your objection. Thanks.
I also wonder why the article Directed acyclic graph says this is the name used in graph theory. I think it is not, except for the computer-science side. I have not seen it in non-CS graph theory articles. As a partial graph theorist I have often referred to "acyclic orientations of graphs", sometimes "acyclic digraphs", and have seen "acyclic digraphs" pretty often. Maybe you can cast light on this. Zaslav ( talk) 05:11, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
So if your examples continue to destroy your claim that the terminology is divided by discipline, the fact that the numbers for "directed acyclic graph" are overwhelmingly higher than for "acyclic digraph" or for "acyclic directed graph" should only become even more convincing evidence for WP:COMMONNAME. Your belief about which name might be more "proper" is not particularly relevant here. — David Eppstein ( talk) 14:26, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red August 2022, Vol 8, Issue 8, Nos 214, 217, 236, 237, 238, 239
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 10:57, 29 July 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Johnbod suggested that maybe you could advise? The issue is a contribution that looks to me to be well-crafted SYNTH and OR but, as the proponent is a teacher (professore) of scenography in an Italian university and I am just an ordinary art-lover, I feel I ought to take advice. Please feel completely free to decline: my guilt complex doesn't make it your problem!
Easiest if I just quote my conversation with JB:
If you have a moment, would you please have a look at Vitruvian Man#Textual analysis relating to body height and column modulation and talk:Vitruvian Man#Relevance of material on the Tuscan Order (though discussion has broadened to cover the whole section)? Is it irredeemable OR? Unfortunately the citations are in Italian so not readily verified. The contributor has written a book on the topic but it is self-published, which is not a good start. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 16:04, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
No need unless it provokes your curiosity. The contributing editor has declined to meet the OR challenge, so I have deleted. A pity, some good material in there and I spent a lot of time cleaning up the citations but in the end it seems to be a classical pseudo-science analysis (result first, evidence later). -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 18:43, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I took a look, but wasn't sure what to say, without more digging. Sorry! Johnbod ( talk) 22:08, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
As it turned out, the contributor is not content and has virtually accused me of incompetence, bad faith and 'rape' of his work (despite previously thanking me at his talk page for cleaning up the text to MOS standards, encapsulating exposed citations and asides etc). What gives me pause is that I don't have the background or expertise to more fundamentally challenge his work. He denies that there is any WP:SYNTH or WP:OR, that his conclusions follow logically, the inference being that I am wikilawyering. So if you could find time to review, I could rest more easily. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 13:52, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
You might ask User:David Eppstein, who's a maths prof & tenacious in discussion. Probably what is needed. Johnbod ( talk) 22:39, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Following requests at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts#Vitruvian Man and talk:Leonardo da Vinci, there has been one more comment along the lines that "this is OR" but without directly addressing the flaws in the proponent's logic. Incidentally, I see that the proponent has added the same material to IT:Uomo vitruviano, in which he explicitly cites his own book (as he had also done here but I deleted it).
After writing that, I am almost at the point of thinking "why am I wasting anyone's time, it is just a load of high-falutin' codswallop" so if you decline, I can walk away with a clear conscience! John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 23:22, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
FYI: After not receiving an answer here, I went ahead and changed the parts which you seemed not to object to (if I understand you correctly). I left the "revolutionize" and "discovery" as it pertains to calculus as-is for now until I fully understand your point of view. Let me know what you think, happy to have consensus here. My aim is readability and staying true to cited sources. 'wɪnd ( talk) 11:02, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Telephone number (mathematics) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Praseodymium-141 -- Praseodymium-141 ( talk) 09:02, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Snark (graph theory) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pi.1415926535 -- Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:40, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
The article Snark (graph theory) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Snark (graph theory) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pi.1415926535 -- Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 20:22, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Here is the link: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:David Eppstein prejudiced comments and demeaning attitude requires attention.
Radlrb ( talk) 21:04, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Please assist me in editing the page. It concerns me, and I corrected some information and added references. Helencullura ( talk) 14:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ David Eppstein, I am not reaching any conclusions regarding Gurinder Singh Mann. Just stating the facts. Can you advise me further on what exactly was wrong in that edit?-- Satdeep Gill ( talk • contribs 19:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
I just saw your figure of a bidirected graph a few days ago. It's outstanding. Thank you. Zaslav ( talk) 15:57, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
As you wish, I don't mind leaving it like that. But there is no such name in Romanian, I assure you. There isn't even any other evidence that she was named Santean before, than her Google Scholar account. She didn't write it with Romanian diacritics, that's all. Example Andrei Sîntean, sometimes also written as Sântean. .karellian-24 ( talk) 08:54, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
You reverted the new section in Tetrahedron defining the Isotetrahedron saying, "Undo addition of material on a topic already covered in another paragraph on exactly the same topic." I do not see this type of tetrahedron defined anywhere else in the page. Are you confusing Isotetrahedrons with Disphenoids ? They are not the same. -- Toploftical ( talk) 21:11, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
I saw that book, too, and mentioned it at the flag image discussion. The info at commons was sourced from FOTW, which has always had the 3:2 ratio image, but includes "As for the proportions of the emblem, Mr. Paul Ahyi has envisaged a 'A rectangle of the golden section' worth 1.618 contributed by Thanh-T�m L�, 02 Jan 1999 (translated from http://www.cosy.sbg.ac.at/~gjohnson/drapeau.html)" ( archive). Commons also references this source that says 2:3. Are any of these RS? I wonder if an actual source can be found. In any case, I softened the statement to say it was the designer's intent; not clear that ever got actualized. Dicklyon ( talk) 20:50, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
@ David Eppstein: any ideas on this flag GR sourcing? Dicklyon ( talk) 05:22, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, David,
I didn't mean to break Wikipedia! Thank you for restoring that template I mistakenly deleted with my blunder. Primefac really helped me out, too. Believe me, this won't happen twice! Liz Read! Talk! 07:35, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day! Hi David Eppstein! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:26, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
You reverted my external link in Fibbinary number with comment "fibbinary numbers are numbers. You add them just like any other number." But this statement contradict with the topic numbers definition: "the fibbinary numbers are the numbers whose binary representation does not contain two consecutive ones." If you add two fibbinary numbers like ordinary numbers, in most cases you acquire the number with consecutive ones in its binary representation. Function suggested by me do correct fibbinary addition, so the result doesn't contain consecutive ones. Uxn ( talk) 19:15, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
What's really disingenuous is to reinstate a website and an article whose only relevance is one statement: "The talk was presented at the 1981 FOCS Symposium in Nashville". That's your idea of proper secondary sourcing? Even more disingenuous is restoring a linkfarm that violates WP:EL, and the attendant linkfarm tag. You had 23 years to actually improve the article. Drmies ( talk) 14:09, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I have two questions 1- To edit the mathematics paper 2- Creating an article
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Euclidean minimum spanning tree you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 07:00, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
I noticed you reverted my "article creation" or something (not great with the lingo, ya know?) on 198. I was not aware of this topic; however, I do believe I mentioned several independent interesting things about 198 that it would be an "example of."a Could you clarify, please?
a198!'s decimal representation begins with 198, there are 198 palindromes between 1 and 10000, 198 is the first integer average of the perfect powers greater than one, and 198 is the first sum of 4 nonzero squares in ten ways. 198 is an "example" of all of those, except perhaps the palindromes. Assuming those are all independent, I most likely ignored something else? HiMyNameIsMatt ( talk) 15:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
The time of "nothing good or healthy happening on Wikipedia" has overlapped with the time of "escalating responsibilities in every other area of life", so I most definitely need to get away from here. I've purged my watchlist and will be logging out in a couple minutes. If you do see me editing anywhere, please drop me a note and confirm that it's really what I want to be doing with my life. XOR'easter ( talk) 18:57, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Greetings David! I've improved the article and thinking to re-nominate for GA. I was wondering if you'd be interested to review it once it's nominated or maybe you can share a feedback how the article looks like now after improvements. Regards, An emperor /// Ave 19:02, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
for your recent attention to the scholarship at Vitruvian Man. If your edit and addition of source allow for removal of any inline tags, please, by all means, do so. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:14C:25DD:3422:6A23:A9ED ( talk) 02:41, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Hey David, you might recall that I had helped out a little on Leonhard Euler FAR, and just recently rewrote most of the Vitruvian man article. I have been working quite a bit on the Euclid article. Particularly the Lead, Life and Lost works sections. However, with my limited knowledge of the intricacies of Euclidean Geometry and related topics, I don't think I'll be able to expand the Elements or Other Works sections much more. I was wondering if you had any interest in improving those sections, perhaps aiming for a collaborative GA? Best – Aza24 (talk) 20:24, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red September 2022, Vol 8, Issue 9, Nos 214, 217, 240, 241
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 15:34, 31 August 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
You are correct that the MathSciNet Mathematical Reviews collaboration distance tool ( https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet/freeTools.html?version=2) does not always give accurate Erdos numbers, because of publications other than research articles being included, but if you want to check an Erdos number it is a very useful tool.
For instance, I used it to confirm that the 2022 Fields medalists all have finite Erdos numbers. You didn't dispute that, most likely because it's true. Turtlens ( talk) 21:19, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether I correctly understand your edit summary in your reversion of my latest edit on the « Isotoxal figure » article:
Indeed:
WTF is an expression of alarm and dismay. No, DO NOT EVER format expressions like
They must either be formatted as
Or (my preference)
More generally, mixing template-math and LaTeX-math in a single article, let alone a single expression, is a bad idea. It creates an inconsistent appearance where the same symbol is typeset in different fonts with different shapes and sizes, making it more confusing for readers to figure out whether it really is the same. If an article involves sufficiently advanced formulas to require LaTeX-math for some of its formulas, it should use it for all of its formulas. — David Eppstein ( talk) 22:13, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Laves graph you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 19:21, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
The article Euclidean minimum spanning tree you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Euclidean minimum spanning tree for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 03:21, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
The article Doyle spiral you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Doyle spiral for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Duckmather -- Duckmather ( talk) 05:01, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
The article Laves graph you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Laves graph for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 18:21, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mutilated chessboard problem you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 18:40, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Can you make sense of the recent edits by Danko Georgiev? [8] and [9] cover their changes. -- JBL ( talk) 19:38, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
The songs are on commons ( c:Category:The Remains of Tom Lehrer) and if you think they are copyvio you should definitely open a XFD there or talk to the user who originally uploaded them. See this section on that users talk page which asked the same question c:User_talk:CalendulaAsteraceae#Category:The Remains of Tom Lehrer. The justification for all of this is the declaration found on Tom Lehrer's website home page which reads as follows:
I, Tom Lehrer, and the Tom Lehrer Trust 2000, hereby grant the following permission:
All the lyrics on this website, whether published or unpublished, copyrighted or uncopyrighted, may be downloaded and used in any manner whatsoever, without requiring any further permission from me or any payment to me or to anyone else.
Some lyrics written by me to copyrighted music by others are included herein, but of course such music may not be used without permission of the copyright owners. (The translated songs may be found in their original languages on YouTube.)
The music of all the songs on this website that were written by me may also be downloaded and used as described above.
In other words, all the lyrics herein and all the music herein that was written by me should be treated as though they were in the public domain.
In particular, permission is hereby granted to anyone to set any of these lyrics to their own music and publish or perform their versions or parodies or distortions of these lyrics without fear of legal action.
(There is no legal way to unilaterally transfer a song into the public domain, so this disclaimer is intended as an end run around the copyright laws.)
Since all the files on commons are a sourced from/can be downloaded from said website, I would think that's why they marked PD on commons. Cakelot1 ( talk) 00:37, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
The music of all the songs on this website that were written by me may also be downloaded and used as described above.All the songs on commons are downloadable from his website. If you think they are copyvio you should bring it to commons, where they are hosted currently. Cakelot1 ( talk) 09:21, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
The article Mutilated chessboard problem you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mutilated chessboard problem for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 20:41, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey David, I was lurking through various project pages that I used to visit when I was more active with editing back in the day including WP:ANI and after having a peek at what unfolded in there with the chain about Doug Coldwell (damn shame, really, seems to be a proper mess with a LOT of fallout that'll have to get cleaned up) I happened upon your userpage, clicked through to your website and I have to say that you've got quite the impressive resume and photography portfolio. Probably my favorite bit of the latter would be your EMP/MoPOP shots from your Seattle series in 2003.
Just wanted to leave my token of appreciation for your works because they're cool! ConCompS talk 06:09, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi David, you might be interested in the lighthouse FPC, per your earlier participation. Bammesk ( talk) 00:27, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Yael Karshon moved from Toronto to Israel in 2021. She is now a Professor in Tel Aviv University ( https://english.tau.ac.il/profile/yaelkarshon_52) and at the same (50%) in University of Toronoto. Roib1 ( talk) 18:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
I just wanted to be sure you notice that I have not pinged you to Talk:Tangent half-angle substitution. Remember that next time you think I never did you any favors. E Eng 23:15, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
On 25 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Euclidean minimum spanning tree, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that physical applications of Euclidean minimum spanning trees range in scale from the particles in bubble chambers to the dark matter halos of galaxies? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Euclidean minimum spanning tree. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Euclidean minimum spanning tree), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
You should review WP:NOPIPE before exerting effort to take direct links and change them to indirect links. There is absolutely no higher purpose in your edits, and they actually make those links and pages less functional. Keystone18 ( talk) 01:16, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Primefac has recently deleted 23 of my blockquotes because of copyright violation. Do you think that the blockquote in K. Gordon Lark is a case of copyright violation? I have 2 objections to Primefac's deletions. First, I doubt that any of the deleted blockquotes are copyright violations. Second, instead of deleting the blockquotes and blocking my access to see what exactly was deleted, I think that the disputed Wikipedia articles should have been moved to draftspace. What is your opinion of this? Please see the "View history" entries in Birdsey Renshaw, Oswald Hewlett Sargent & Frank William Peek. Suslindisambiguator ( talk)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kite (geometry) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 04:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Dear David,
I read your comments made in the article on Binomial Coefficient (sec. Congruences and sec. Divisibility Properties). I agree with you in that the article as a whole needs improvement. I am also aware that the edit I propose involves a conflict of interest. So, it seems to me that I should choose not to express myself in this debate and stay in the crowd for you and your collaborators to decide on the best way to edit this material. Perhaps I should say that I proposed these changes with the intention of disseminating knowledge that I found interesting and new. With kind regards, Dario T. de Castro ( talk) 10:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red October 2022, Vol 8, Issue 10, Nos 214, 217, 242, 243, 244
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 14:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sushmita Ruj until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Laterthanyouthink ( talk) 13:34, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
The article Prince Rupert's cube you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Prince Rupert's cube for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 19:22, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
Dear Prof. Epstein, I hope all is well. I think it is possible the second review you link of this person's books is not to a book by this Mr Tausch.... but another one.: Schöneweiss, H. G. (1956). Die Lautentwicklung der Mundarten des Trièves (Dauphiné, Dép. Isère). Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Romanische Sprachwissenschaft Nr. 11. by Arno Tausch Romanische Forschungen, 68. Bd., 1./2. H., pp. 165-167 https://www.jstor.org/stable/27936524 Just letting you know in case you would like to check. Best wishes ( Msrasnw ( talk) 10:28, 11 July 2022 (UTC))
This AfD: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Łukaszyk–Karmowski_metric seems like it falls within your sphere of interest. PianoDan ( talk) 14:42, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Could you tell me what part of my edit was 'unduly negative'? I put much research time in the edit and tried to be factual. Moonrakercrystal ( talk) 17:57, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
RE: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ihor_Bohachevsky 666hopedieslast ( talk) 13:20, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I filed at AIV but saw that you were recently active and might be able to get to it faster: Can you please deal with this vandal? Funcrunch ( talk) 07:15, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
On 18 July 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ellaisa Marquis, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ellaisa Marquis has been called the "marquis player" of women's football in Saint Lucia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ellaisa Marquis. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Ellaisa Marquis), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:02, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Io1026 ( talk) 18:57, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meeko Oishi until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Uricdivine ( talk) 00:00, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Quadrisecant you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 20:01, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
The file File:Turan-13-4.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Unused. Superseded by File:Turan 13-4.svg.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
files for discussion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion. --
Minorax«¦
talk¦» 13:03, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
A bit of a random request, but you're an admin and the deleting admin, Liz, has been very busy. Could you restore the deleted page The Heat Is On (TV series) and move it without redirect to Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia/The Heat Is On (TV series) for preservation at WP:HOAXLIST? (Liz indicated on her talk ( User talk:Liz#The Heat is On) that she was okay with doing that. Ovinus ( talk) 18:57, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
The article Quadrisecant you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Quadrisecant for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 19:02, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Dr. Eppstein, please explain why you object to graph theory usage, specifically on "Polytree"? There was nothing gratuitous about it, I only reflect the terms as used in graph theory. Would you be happy if I make all the terms graphically correct, or do you refuse to use "acyclic directed graph", or what? I am confused. I'm sure you know all the terminology; I do not understand your objection. Thanks.
I also wonder why the article Directed acyclic graph says this is the name used in graph theory. I think it is not, except for the computer-science side. I have not seen it in non-CS graph theory articles. As a partial graph theorist I have often referred to "acyclic orientations of graphs", sometimes "acyclic digraphs", and have seen "acyclic digraphs" pretty often. Maybe you can cast light on this. Zaslav ( talk) 05:11, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
So if your examples continue to destroy your claim that the terminology is divided by discipline, the fact that the numbers for "directed acyclic graph" are overwhelmingly higher than for "acyclic digraph" or for "acyclic directed graph" should only become even more convincing evidence for WP:COMMONNAME. Your belief about which name might be more "proper" is not particularly relevant here. — David Eppstein ( talk) 14:26, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red August 2022, Vol 8, Issue 8, Nos 214, 217, 236, 237, 238, 239
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 10:57, 29 July 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Johnbod suggested that maybe you could advise? The issue is a contribution that looks to me to be well-crafted SYNTH and OR but, as the proponent is a teacher (professore) of scenography in an Italian university and I am just an ordinary art-lover, I feel I ought to take advice. Please feel completely free to decline: my guilt complex doesn't make it your problem!
Easiest if I just quote my conversation with JB:
If you have a moment, would you please have a look at Vitruvian Man#Textual analysis relating to body height and column modulation and talk:Vitruvian Man#Relevance of material on the Tuscan Order (though discussion has broadened to cover the whole section)? Is it irredeemable OR? Unfortunately the citations are in Italian so not readily verified. The contributor has written a book on the topic but it is self-published, which is not a good start. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 16:04, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
No need unless it provokes your curiosity. The contributing editor has declined to meet the OR challenge, so I have deleted. A pity, some good material in there and I spent a lot of time cleaning up the citations but in the end it seems to be a classical pseudo-science analysis (result first, evidence later). -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 18:43, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I took a look, but wasn't sure what to say, without more digging. Sorry! Johnbod ( talk) 22:08, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
As it turned out, the contributor is not content and has virtually accused me of incompetence, bad faith and 'rape' of his work (despite previously thanking me at his talk page for cleaning up the text to MOS standards, encapsulating exposed citations and asides etc). What gives me pause is that I don't have the background or expertise to more fundamentally challenge his work. He denies that there is any WP:SYNTH or WP:OR, that his conclusions follow logically, the inference being that I am wikilawyering. So if you could find time to review, I could rest more easily. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 13:52, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
You might ask User:David Eppstein, who's a maths prof & tenacious in discussion. Probably what is needed. Johnbod ( talk) 22:39, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Following requests at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Visual arts#Vitruvian Man and talk:Leonardo da Vinci, there has been one more comment along the lines that "this is OR" but without directly addressing the flaws in the proponent's logic. Incidentally, I see that the proponent has added the same material to IT:Uomo vitruviano, in which he explicitly cites his own book (as he had also done here but I deleted it).
After writing that, I am almost at the point of thinking "why am I wasting anyone's time, it is just a load of high-falutin' codswallop" so if you decline, I can walk away with a clear conscience! John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 23:22, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
FYI: After not receiving an answer here, I went ahead and changed the parts which you seemed not to object to (if I understand you correctly). I left the "revolutionize" and "discovery" as it pertains to calculus as-is for now until I fully understand your point of view. Let me know what you think, happy to have consensus here. My aim is readability and staying true to cited sources. 'wɪnd ( talk) 11:02, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Telephone number (mathematics) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Praseodymium-141 -- Praseodymium-141 ( talk) 09:02, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Snark (graph theory) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pi.1415926535 -- Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 21:40, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
The article Snark (graph theory) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Snark (graph theory) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pi.1415926535 -- Pi.1415926535 ( talk) 20:22, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Here is the link: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:David Eppstein prejudiced comments and demeaning attitude requires attention.
Radlrb ( talk) 21:04, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Please assist me in editing the page. It concerns me, and I corrected some information and added references. Helencullura ( talk) 14:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Hi @ David Eppstein, I am not reaching any conclusions regarding Gurinder Singh Mann. Just stating the facts. Can you advise me further on what exactly was wrong in that edit?-- Satdeep Gill ( talk • contribs 19:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
I just saw your figure of a bidirected graph a few days ago. It's outstanding. Thank you. Zaslav ( talk) 15:57, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
As you wish, I don't mind leaving it like that. But there is no such name in Romanian, I assure you. There isn't even any other evidence that she was named Santean before, than her Google Scholar account. She didn't write it with Romanian diacritics, that's all. Example Andrei Sîntean, sometimes also written as Sântean. .karellian-24 ( talk) 08:54, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
You reverted the new section in Tetrahedron defining the Isotetrahedron saying, "Undo addition of material on a topic already covered in another paragraph on exactly the same topic." I do not see this type of tetrahedron defined anywhere else in the page. Are you confusing Isotetrahedrons with Disphenoids ? They are not the same. -- Toploftical ( talk) 21:11, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
I saw that book, too, and mentioned it at the flag image discussion. The info at commons was sourced from FOTW, which has always had the 3:2 ratio image, but includes "As for the proportions of the emblem, Mr. Paul Ahyi has envisaged a 'A rectangle of the golden section' worth 1.618 contributed by Thanh-T�m L�, 02 Jan 1999 (translated from http://www.cosy.sbg.ac.at/~gjohnson/drapeau.html)" ( archive). Commons also references this source that says 2:3. Are any of these RS? I wonder if an actual source can be found. In any case, I softened the statement to say it was the designer's intent; not clear that ever got actualized. Dicklyon ( talk) 20:50, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
@ David Eppstein: any ideas on this flag GR sourcing? Dicklyon ( talk) 05:22, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, David,
I didn't mean to break Wikipedia! Thank you for restoring that template I mistakenly deleted with my blunder. Primefac really helped me out, too. Believe me, this won't happen twice! Liz Read! Talk! 07:35, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day! Hi David Eppstein! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:26, 21 August 2022 (UTC) |
You reverted my external link in Fibbinary number with comment "fibbinary numbers are numbers. You add them just like any other number." But this statement contradict with the topic numbers definition: "the fibbinary numbers are the numbers whose binary representation does not contain two consecutive ones." If you add two fibbinary numbers like ordinary numbers, in most cases you acquire the number with consecutive ones in its binary representation. Function suggested by me do correct fibbinary addition, so the result doesn't contain consecutive ones. Uxn ( talk) 19:15, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
What's really disingenuous is to reinstate a website and an article whose only relevance is one statement: "The talk was presented at the 1981 FOCS Symposium in Nashville". That's your idea of proper secondary sourcing? Even more disingenuous is restoring a linkfarm that violates WP:EL, and the attendant linkfarm tag. You had 23 years to actually improve the article. Drmies ( talk) 14:09, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I have two questions 1- To edit the mathematics paper 2- Creating an article
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Euclidean minimum spanning tree you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 07:00, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Hello,
I noticed you reverted my "article creation" or something (not great with the lingo, ya know?) on 198. I was not aware of this topic; however, I do believe I mentioned several independent interesting things about 198 that it would be an "example of."a Could you clarify, please?
a198!'s decimal representation begins with 198, there are 198 palindromes between 1 and 10000, 198 is the first integer average of the perfect powers greater than one, and 198 is the first sum of 4 nonzero squares in ten ways. 198 is an "example" of all of those, except perhaps the palindromes. Assuming those are all independent, I most likely ignored something else? HiMyNameIsMatt ( talk) 15:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
The time of "nothing good or healthy happening on Wikipedia" has overlapped with the time of "escalating responsibilities in every other area of life", so I most definitely need to get away from here. I've purged my watchlist and will be logging out in a couple minutes. If you do see me editing anywhere, please drop me a note and confirm that it's really what I want to be doing with my life. XOR'easter ( talk) 18:57, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Greetings David! I've improved the article and thinking to re-nominate for GA. I was wondering if you'd be interested to review it once it's nominated or maybe you can share a feedback how the article looks like now after improvements. Regards, An emperor /// Ave 19:02, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
for your recent attention to the scholarship at Vitruvian Man. If your edit and addition of source allow for removal of any inline tags, please, by all means, do so. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:14C:25DD:3422:6A23:A9ED ( talk) 02:41, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Hey David, you might recall that I had helped out a little on Leonhard Euler FAR, and just recently rewrote most of the Vitruvian man article. I have been working quite a bit on the Euclid article. Particularly the Lead, Life and Lost works sections. However, with my limited knowledge of the intricacies of Euclidean Geometry and related topics, I don't think I'll be able to expand the Elements or Other Works sections much more. I was wondering if you had any interest in improving those sections, perhaps aiming for a collaborative GA? Best – Aza24 (talk) 20:24, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red September 2022, Vol 8, Issue 9, Nos 214, 217, 240, 241
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 15:34, 31 August 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging
You are correct that the MathSciNet Mathematical Reviews collaboration distance tool ( https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet/freeTools.html?version=2) does not always give accurate Erdos numbers, because of publications other than research articles being included, but if you want to check an Erdos number it is a very useful tool.
For instance, I used it to confirm that the 2022 Fields medalists all have finite Erdos numbers. You didn't dispute that, most likely because it's true. Turtlens ( talk) 21:19, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether I correctly understand your edit summary in your reversion of my latest edit on the « Isotoxal figure » article:
Indeed:
WTF is an expression of alarm and dismay. No, DO NOT EVER format expressions like
They must either be formatted as
Or (my preference)
More generally, mixing template-math and LaTeX-math in a single article, let alone a single expression, is a bad idea. It creates an inconsistent appearance where the same symbol is typeset in different fonts with different shapes and sizes, making it more confusing for readers to figure out whether it really is the same. If an article involves sufficiently advanced formulas to require LaTeX-math for some of its formulas, it should use it for all of its formulas. — David Eppstein ( talk) 22:13, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Laves graph you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 19:21, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
The article Euclidean minimum spanning tree you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Euclidean minimum spanning tree for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 03:21, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
The article Doyle spiral you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Doyle spiral for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Duckmather -- Duckmather ( talk) 05:01, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
The article Laves graph you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Laves graph for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 18:21, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mutilated chessboard problem you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 18:40, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Can you make sense of the recent edits by Danko Georgiev? [8] and [9] cover their changes. -- JBL ( talk) 19:38, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
The songs are on commons ( c:Category:The Remains of Tom Lehrer) and if you think they are copyvio you should definitely open a XFD there or talk to the user who originally uploaded them. See this section on that users talk page which asked the same question c:User_talk:CalendulaAsteraceae#Category:The Remains of Tom Lehrer. The justification for all of this is the declaration found on Tom Lehrer's website home page which reads as follows:
I, Tom Lehrer, and the Tom Lehrer Trust 2000, hereby grant the following permission:
All the lyrics on this website, whether published or unpublished, copyrighted or uncopyrighted, may be downloaded and used in any manner whatsoever, without requiring any further permission from me or any payment to me or to anyone else.
Some lyrics written by me to copyrighted music by others are included herein, but of course such music may not be used without permission of the copyright owners. (The translated songs may be found in their original languages on YouTube.)
The music of all the songs on this website that were written by me may also be downloaded and used as described above.
In other words, all the lyrics herein and all the music herein that was written by me should be treated as though they were in the public domain.
In particular, permission is hereby granted to anyone to set any of these lyrics to their own music and publish or perform their versions or parodies or distortions of these lyrics without fear of legal action.
(There is no legal way to unilaterally transfer a song into the public domain, so this disclaimer is intended as an end run around the copyright laws.)
Since all the files on commons are a sourced from/can be downloaded from said website, I would think that's why they marked PD on commons. Cakelot1 ( talk) 00:37, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
The music of all the songs on this website that were written by me may also be downloaded and used as described above.All the songs on commons are downloadable from his website. If you think they are copyvio you should bring it to commons, where they are hosted currently. Cakelot1 ( talk) 09:21, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
The article Mutilated chessboard problem you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mutilated chessboard problem for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 20:41, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Hey David, I was lurking through various project pages that I used to visit when I was more active with editing back in the day including WP:ANI and after having a peek at what unfolded in there with the chain about Doug Coldwell (damn shame, really, seems to be a proper mess with a LOT of fallout that'll have to get cleaned up) I happened upon your userpage, clicked through to your website and I have to say that you've got quite the impressive resume and photography portfolio. Probably my favorite bit of the latter would be your EMP/MoPOP shots from your Seattle series in 2003.
Just wanted to leave my token of appreciation for your works because they're cool! ConCompS talk 06:09, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi David, you might be interested in the lighthouse FPC, per your earlier participation. Bammesk ( talk) 00:27, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Yael Karshon moved from Toronto to Israel in 2021. She is now a Professor in Tel Aviv University ( https://english.tau.ac.il/profile/yaelkarshon_52) and at the same (50%) in University of Toronoto. Roib1 ( talk) 18:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
I just wanted to be sure you notice that I have not pinged you to Talk:Tangent half-angle substitution. Remember that next time you think I never did you any favors. E Eng 23:15, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
On 25 September 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Euclidean minimum spanning tree, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that physical applications of Euclidean minimum spanning trees range in scale from the particles in bubble chambers to the dark matter halos of galaxies? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Euclidean minimum spanning tree. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Euclidean minimum spanning tree), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
You should review WP:NOPIPE before exerting effort to take direct links and change them to indirect links. There is absolutely no higher purpose in your edits, and they actually make those links and pages less functional. Keystone18 ( talk) 01:16, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Primefac has recently deleted 23 of my blockquotes because of copyright violation. Do you think that the blockquote in K. Gordon Lark is a case of copyright violation? I have 2 objections to Primefac's deletions. First, I doubt that any of the deleted blockquotes are copyright violations. Second, instead of deleting the blockquotes and blocking my access to see what exactly was deleted, I think that the disputed Wikipedia articles should have been moved to draftspace. What is your opinion of this? Please see the "View history" entries in Birdsey Renshaw, Oswald Hewlett Sargent & Frank William Peek. Suslindisambiguator ( talk)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kite (geometry) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ovinus -- Ovinus ( talk) 04:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Dear David,
I read your comments made in the article on Binomial Coefficient (sec. Congruences and sec. Divisibility Properties). I agree with you in that the article as a whole needs improvement. I am also aware that the edit I propose involves a conflict of interest. So, it seems to me that I should choose not to express myself in this debate and stay in the crowd for you and your collaborators to decide on the best way to edit this material. Perhaps I should say that I proposed these changes with the intention of disseminating knowledge that I found interesting and new. With kind regards, Dario T. de Castro ( talk) 10:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Women in Red October 2022, Vol 8, Issue 10, Nos 214, 217, 242, 243, 244
|
-- Lajmmoore ( talk) 14:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC) via MassMessaging