Augustine Prevost is born in Geneva, Switzerland from parents of Bossy, Geneva, Switzerland as Augustine Prévost.
Thanks for removing the reference to Carella's paper in August and for explaining why it is incorrect. I did something similar several months ago, but he did not understand about Omega and he put back the reference to his preprint. (Carella has many preprints on the arXiv claiming proofs of famous conjectures, but he has no published papers.) Jsondow ( talk) 14:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your recent comments on my talk page. You are right! Jsondow ( talk) 21:37, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Carella has finally managed to publish a paper! It is "Least Prime Primitive Roots", freely available at [1] for downloading. Please let me know if you find a mistake. Thanks! Jsondow ( talk) 21:07, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your interest! For his reference to Montgomery and Vaughan 19, p. 55 see [2]. For his Hardy and Wright reference 11, p. 473 see sections 22.10 and 22.11 in the 5th edition. I don't have the other two references. I hope you can locate them. For Cojocaru and Murty try searching in [3]. Jsondow ( talk) 03:15, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Good point! Why not send the International Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science a note rebutting Carella's paper? Jsondow ( talk) 16:48, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback, I replied on my talk page. Feel free to make further adjustments in the article. -- Bobak ( talk) 16:07, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Did you even read the talk page after I reverted you again? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 07:34, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this sentence? -- 50.53.60.41 ( talk) 17:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
What does your edit summary mean "No, Mémoires de l'Académie Impériale des Sciences de St. Pétersbourg, vol. 7, pp.17-33, 1850". Are you claiming that source does not exist? Spinning Spark 20:54, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
For crying out loud keep the conversation in one place.
Please avoid labelling as vandalism the cancellation of a paragraph whose content has nothing to do with the title of it. I have deleted it because, contrary to what is claimed in the text, the paper reviewed there has nothing to do with an attempt, of any nature, to prove the Riemann hypothesis. Just giving a further conjecture which would imply the Riemann Hypothesis is by no means a sufficient motivation to be called an attempt of proving the Riemann hypothesis, more especially if nobody has ever tried to prove that conjecture after it was stated, as it happens to be the case. Columns17 ( talk) 15:41, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Just a heads up, since you reverted Karak1lc1k's last edit. I found a journal source for Azeri Turkish and have added it to the article. Thanks. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 18:49, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you reverted my 2 previous edits to this article with regards to abuse of notation. I think the abuse is quite obvious since the = isn't an equivalence relation. I also think it's good to remind people of this since it's quite frstrating to see = meaning element of, subset, equals all at the same time. But since you seem to disagree I'd like to know your views on this matter. Cheers! Smk65536 ( talk) 21:28, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Hey why did you delete the paragraph explaining the relation between infinity symbol and Möbius sign? Nisankoc ( talk) 15:08, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Marjane Satrapi was a guest at Santa Barbara City College and invited by Prof. Manoutchehr Eskandari-Qajar. Asked by him about her Qajar lineage she said she did not know. First she claimed to be a descendant of Soltan Ahmad Shah, later of Nasser ed-Din Shah. Of both men we have a list of descendants in a registry of the Kadjar Family Association; she is not mentioned in it and her family is not known with the descendants of Nasser ed-Din Shah. When we asked her first cousin (Satrapi) about a Qajar lineage, he informed us he did not know of any. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darakeh ( talk • contribs) 07:44, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, what is the time frame we are talking about? I am the genealogist of the Qajar Family (Association) and editor-in-chief of Qajar Studies. It is annoying to have false claims, especially when a person claims to be your relative, while that person is not know in the family. It is nothing personal against Marjane, the opposite, she is a very talented lady; but truth should prevail! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:980:1A19:1:448D:B04E:CD7D:191 ( talk) 08:55, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, the genealogy of the family on the websites referred to in the link you just sent ( Kadscharen website / Qajars website ) are in my hands. IQSA have had conferences held and annual journals published for the last 15 years. We have an elaborate family database, which is kept up-to-date constantly. In the board of the Qajar Family Association I am responsible for memberships and I have all the genealogies of the different branches under my care. Kindest regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:980:1A19:1:448D:B04E:CD7D:191 ( talk) 10:23, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank You! I really do hope a serious source IS offered, because it is always better to gain relatives than to loose them .......... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:980:1A19:1:448D:B04E:CD7D:191 ( talk) 13:05, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello. You're free to add his burial place if you find a proper reliable source for it, but you cannot add it if it's only sourced to a non-RS user-contributed web site, a site that is also being actively spammed. Thomas.W talk 20:18, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Why did you revert the latest version on the Numa Pompilius page? It clarifies what legends it's talking about. Is there a particular reason you like the original wording so much? Perfect Orange Sphere ( talk) 16:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Hallo, WP:OPENPARA, a guideline of wikipedia, is absolutely clear about the nationality that should appear on the lead.
"if (the person is) notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national or permanent resident when the person became notable."
Now, Lagrange became notable when he was still in Turin (the king of Prussia in his invitation to Berlin called him the foremost mathematician in Europe), reached the apogee of his fame in Berlin, then went to Paris, where among others he became French citizen. Notability was reached in Italy, so only the Italian nationality should be mentioned in the opening paragraph (not elsewhere, of course). I know that this rule is not optimal, but has the advantage to be clear and precise, and as a rule must be followed. In other cases (f.e. at Riccardo Giacconi, Richard Rogers, Andrew Viterbi) I had to remove the Italian nationality from the lead. If you don't like it, and want to introduce another rule (like the double nationality, which I can approve) please open a thread on the discussion page of the manual of style. Otherwise, at your next revert I will be forced to open a thread at ANI. Thanks, Alex2006 ( talk) 16:40, 22 March 2016 (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. I'm distressed to see you jumping to calling a perfectly reasonable quote by Alessandro "dishonest" above. [8] Please show other editors respect . Bishonen | talk 15:27, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi
Updated info rather than another revert. It's the world's largest by area, joint 18th (not 10th) by leasable retail space. Best, Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 10:03, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
The classical proof of Lagrange's sum of four squares theorem seems to be missing something. ie it contains "Similarly, for b taking ..." with no previous mention of b. A quick glance at another website shows more. Is there a chunk of text missing? JohnOliverZ ( talk) 08:34, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
If you have a problem with the edits to the graphic design section on the Infinity symbol article use the Talk page to discuss them. Looking through your User talk page, I can see that you have been warned about edit wars before. Please refer to the January 2016 warning above. Looks like you have also been accused multiple times of being belligerent to other editors. Perhaps you should remember that Wikipedia is not just a platform for your own personal opinions. CrocodilesAreForWimps ( talk) 19:13, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I've explained several times that the content you twice restored is a blatant copyright violation. I've requested further assistance here [9]. Please feel free to comment. Thanks, 2601:188:1:AEA0:64A2:63B:81A0:A51F ( talk) 15:17, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Looks like you missed the link in the edit summary for the IP editors copyrighted content removal. It's pretty clearly a copyright violation. I've removed the content again. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns about my revert. Best wishes. Waggie ( talk) 16:08, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I don't particularly care which era system is used in articles; but as far as I know, the constraints and terms of WP:ERA still apply. Could you please give me a link to the Wikipedia policy or consensus that overides it in this particular case? Thanks, Haploidavey ( talk) 21:13, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I want to inform you recently, I edited the List of Prime Ministers of Iran and corrected its mistakes. I hope you find it useful. Best regards. Shfarshid ( talk) 02:14, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for being a hero of disruption, in removing perfectly neutral and most likely correct information, as you did in this edit. If we only had more editors like you, Wikipedia would contain so much less information, and wouldn't that be good? I haven't seen the likes of your edit in productiveness in the longest time. Must be hard, to be such an active contributor to this encyclopedia. Debresser ( talk) 23:25, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
The reversion was explained as "Hazy assertion, certainly inappropriate in the lead". Would you like this statement clarified further and placed somewhere else? Or is this article not the appropriate place to mention this? Thanks. -- Fylwind ( talk) 01:15, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
a(n) = 6n + O(log n)
. Proving that the density is 1/6 simply involves fixing a, noting that the density of the subsequence is `1/(4a × 8)`, and then summing over all a (this is where the uniqueness of a and b is needed: to prevent overlapping subsequences), which leads to a geometric sum with value 1/6. Does this sounds sensible? --
Fylwind (
talk) 00:13, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Then perhaps you could have bothered to format it correctly, which was the first reason I reverted? Too much work, I guess. In addition, it is not a reference, and it is not a note, so why is it listed when no other specific proof not referenced is listed? If it belongs anywhere, it belongs in the page on the proofs, not on the page of the theorem itself. And if it is added to the page of proofs, it needs to be summarized there, not merely dropped, badly formatted, into a random place of the article. Magidin ( talk) 02:35, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Please, go to to understand who "really" is Vituzzu ( https://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/4/42/Mewhenreadingstupidstuff.gif/revision/latest?cb=20051111042000 Vituzzu reverting BD for the 1000 time)...anyway thanks for your tentative to save information about Berytus, regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.244.42 ( talk) 14:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
I suppose you're too busy to ask for a source or just give me some time to give one. You've a despicable attitude. I'm sorry you've nothing more positive to do than removing things. Poor man, I'm really sorry for the vaccum you live in. BIRDIE ® 10:01, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
You undo the change I did. However my change was not vandalism but a correction. Just look at Riemann's paper wolfram etc. Even in the same Wikipedia page the correct formula exits in the Mellin-type integrals section. I wrote the explanation in the "Riemann zeta function" talk page. Please return my change or explain to me what was I wrong about. Adikatz ( talk) 07:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, there are more than 25 sources in List of twin towns and sister cities in China isn't in English. And a provision in Wikipedia:Verifiability: "Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia." I think the Chinese source is ok.-- xiliuheshui※ MESSAGE BOARD 04:01, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello. The material that was removed from the article does indeed qualify as reference spam for a number of reasons, ranging from containing inline external links that were neither needed (since we have an article about that subject here, see message on User talk:Jhansc) nor allowed here, to being added to a considerable number of articles by an editor with an obvious conflict of interest. So I suggest you trust the judgement of experienced users reverting material for being spam, even if it doesn't look like spam to you, because reference spamming is usually done in such a way that it isn't obvious to editors who look at only one or two articles, but requires seeing the full picture. Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W talk 22:23, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Just letting you know that the third opinion was officially dropped off at Talk:Patrice Lumumba. Perhaps this will help us reach consensus? - Indy beetle ( talk) 04:00, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Fisrtly, it doesn't matter if it was Switzerland at the time or not — it matters whether it's Switzerland today or not. Secondly, Category:Male writers and Category:Historians and Category:Politicians are all categories that are required to be as strictly empty of individual articles as possible — all people in them are supposed to be subcategorized on some criterion or other, with the undifferentiated parent category containing zero articles directly. Bearcat ( talk) 21:39, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Axiomus ( talk) 11:16, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi. My bad. I published my changes because of an edit conflict with you earlier which added back some of the unsourced ones. Sorry. Vaselineeeeeeee ★★★ 22:08, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Sapphorain! Thank you for all the good work that you do. I saw what you wrote in the talk page of Marie Huber, and as I have seen that you have a very understandable feeling about these categories - I have some knowledge in history myself, so I know the feeling! - I thought that I should at least give you a reply. Please remember, that I do not say this to reprimand you in any way, or try to make you adjust to any policy whatsoever: I simply though to explain, and I hope that is quite alright.
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of twin towns and sister cities in Paraguay is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of twin towns and sister cities in Paraguay until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. — Bkell ( talk) 04:37, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Galobtter ( pingó mió) 16:44, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi there
I came across this article today and I spotted the flaw in the paradox. About which I posted an update on the page earlier today. You since deleted the comment.
Please explain why you deleted it. I believe my logic is correct.
Thank you Hylton Hyltonr ( talk) 22:17, 10 May 2018 (UTC) Hyltonr ( talk) 22:17, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
So a single unreputable source is ok? I thought things had to be factually accurate? Especially when the assertion is on someone's character. How can a non-reputable source stand, on any Wikipedia article, let alone a historic figure? The reason there is only one source is because the man's life has been documented thoroughly. This assertion appears nowhere else, but here...and it is made by a historical fiction writer, without any merit. It's no different than me making an "assertion" and putting it on my website and someone citing it. How can this stand? ...(p.s. sorry for the multiple edits) Justbean ( talk) 13:49, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Can you explain why you removed Barrow, Alaska from the list of sister cities in the US even though it is listed as such on Barrow's and Ushuaia's pages ad on the official list? Blair277( talk) 15:54, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
You are deleted my contribution because source is in Polish (although many other sources are in Polish too but they still are not removed). There is nowhere any source in English in this topic (partner cities of Augustów). My source is from official site of this city's Town Hall. Why this is so unacceptable for you? KarolDz95 ( talk) 19:52, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
See: sr:Смедерево#Партнерски градови and sr:Spisak pobratimljenih gradova u Srbiji#Smederevo
See also this:
WP does not recognise Genevan as a nationality. Any more of this & it goes to CFD, where it will certainly be deleted. Johnbod ( talk) 21:49, 10 June 2018 (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. Johnbod ( talk) 23:58, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 15:09, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
The Farey Sequence F_2 is (0,1/2,1) and the sum over F_2 will be (cos(0*2*pi) + cos(1/2*2*pi) + cos(1*2*pi) =1) which is not 0, therefore: Exclude 0. /info/en/?search=M%C3%B6bius_function
Sorry for interrupting but if you check the Gela article also, Eleusis and Gela are twinned towns based on their common history with poet Aeschylus.Thank you.Also please write a summary on your changes. AlbusTheWhite ( talk) 17:00, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
I added a citation directing to Eleusis official candidate booklet for european capital of culture mentioning that it is twinned with Gela AlbusTheWhite ( talk) 17:27, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi Sapphorain. Please could you be more cautious in removing sourced entries with out-dated links. Based on the URL and access dates provided, the original citations for North Baddesley and Plymouth were easily found on Internet Archive, so I've restored them with updated references. Even where this is not possible, the guidance at WP:BADLINK says "do not delete cited information solely because the URL to the source does not work any longer". Cheers, AJ Cham 09:37, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Sapphorain. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Good evening Sapphorain Please see the talk pages for Geneva concerning your recent reversions of my edits
ArbieP ( talk) 22:36, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Good evening Sapphorain
Please see Talk:Geneva#Citations_in_the_Notable_people_section
Thankyou ArbieP ( talk) 18:20, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Wow, you are still the most stubborn person I know on here. The same way as you did not accept your obvious error in the case of Lausanne you start now the same obvious stubborness even though I already gave you an undisputable source. You just need to read it - again! -- ZH8000 ( talk) 19:40, 11 February 2019 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sapphorain reported by User:ZH8000 (Result: ). Thank you. ZH8000 ( talk) 20:15, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Bbb23 (
talk) 23:27, 11 February 2019 (UTC)Dear
Sapphorain,
Thank you for sending me thanks via the Thankyou button, for
this edit. Your earlier
revert prompted me to approach our colleague
Robman94 for advice on how to upload a cropped/portrait version of the original photo. In his usual helpful way, Rob graciously took the initiative of creating a cleaner, portrait version of that photo and uploading it himself into Commons, so that all I had to do was simply link to it in the
Robert Desnos article. Therefore, I feel all thanks must really go to Rob, and I have already done that; but I also wanted to thank you for taking the time to express your appreciation for my small part in all this.
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(
guestbook) 20:19, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Eduard Douwes Dekker Multatuli was a free macon for sure. You might not like it but he was.
greetings J.T.W.A.Cornelisse ( talk) 19:19, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Luschny is an amateur mathematician whose section of Bernoulli number entitled "Generalization to the odd-index Bernoulli numbers" should be removed, for the following reasons.
1. In the title, "Generalization" is not explained: generalization of what?
2. His sequence B_n is incorrect: the notation "B_n" means the usual the n-th Bernoulli number, which is zero when n > 1 is odd, but all the values of his sequence are nonzero. He needs to use a different notation, not "B_n".
Would you kindly remove this section? I am not sure how to remove it myself. Thanks. Jsondow ( talk) 16:00, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! Jsondow ( talk) 17:19, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
You continue to remove my submissions however if you look at the annual sister cities report, all of thé sister cities I added to the list are recognized by Sister Cities International Lexingtonsistercities ( talk) 03:44, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
I see the original translation as losing context on the stress placed on 'their' disregard for life. Reverse translation shows lower vector distance in favor of the edit. I am aware this is not always a good indicator, and I apologize if it doesn't check out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.64.127.128 ( talk) 06:41, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
\
I skipped by the second reference the Lumière website, because when read the website the source is HDS. That is double pointing at eachother. The first one hDS is than the source. Boss-well63 ( talk) 14:32, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Any particular reason why you undid my addition of a completely relevant category on Peter Christian Bønecke? Ramblersen2 ( talk) 00:16, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Material that is uncited and challenged is subject to deletion. You do not get to simply insert completely unreferenced material into wikipedia. This is basic. Please don't. -- 2604:2000:E010:1100:64FC:4B20:C241:B249 ( talk) 02:57, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
You needed me to revise this. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mie_Prefecture It's not only a sister city, but sister regions in general. Aklearoth ( talk) 09:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Riemann hypothesis shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Frankly, it is difficult to distinguish your behavior there from trolling. -- JBL ( talk) 20:30, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
I must have fat-fingered something on my IPad. It was never my intention to revert you. Terribly sorry for the inconvenience. Kleuske ( talk) 07:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Naruhito, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DrKay ( talk) 18:18, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Sapphorain, I invite you to engage in a discussion at Talk:Calvin Coolidge#"Served as" vs. "was" to avoid further ping-pong on this choice of language. Let's see if we can develop a consensus through discussion. Cheers, HopsonRoad ( talk) 22:19, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
If you have found better sources, good, but please add one of them to the article to back up your findings. Deb ( talk) 09:02, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
I dont think there are enough articles about Genevan scientists to divide into different sciences. You have left Jean-André Deluc in Category:Swiss geologists but taken out the 18th century. That doesnt seem very logical. Do you think its unacceptable to call him Swiss? He appears to have worked in Switzerland - and other places - not just in Geneva. As far as scientists go their place of operation is more significant than their place of birth. Rathfelder ( talk) 08:02, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Ask yourself, did your repeated pressing of revert, and doing nothing else help here? Please do not contact me further. 89.107.6.68 ( talk) 22:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Frances Bavier: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. POLITANVM talk 21:23, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
I agree totally. The 40-character limit on short descriptions usually results in something that at best is so terse as to be pointless and at worst, seriously misleading. I have tried but failed to challenge this asinine policy, see Wikipedia talk:Short description/Archive 9#Length – 40 or 90 characters??. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 00:57, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
When you tag articles as [citation needed], especially articles that have already recently passed a Good Article review, can you at least put some effort into making sure that the footnotes already present in the article, immediately following the claim you are unsure about in the same paragraph, do not already provide a reference for exactly the material that you are questioning? Thanks! — David Eppstein ( talk) 22:32, 28 March 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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sapphorain reported by User:2804:248:F666:900:44BF:96AB:C7A9:2D03 (Result: ). Thank you. Mr Eat ( talk) 23:26, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Apparently the creator of the map made a website explaining it, it is down but fortunately there is an archived version:
https://web.archive.org/web/20191202005150/http://www.high-castle-world-map.com:80/
What's your opinion of it? -- 2804:248:f65c:9c00:e9a7:78b:55e8:dd75 ( talk) 21:33, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
Regarding this edit, the Republic of Geneva ended in 1798 (with a very brief reestablishment in 1813-1815). This person was obviously known as a Swiss theologian, not as a Genevan Reublican theologian. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:21, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
"Bring the Jubilee" is a U.S.-topic article, so by MOS:ENGVAR the spelling "scrutinized" with a Z should be used, not "scrutinised" with a S. Also, as you can read in other sections of the Wikipedia Manual of Style, British punctuation practices are favored in that quote marks are in their "logical" positions (not reversed with other punctuation marks), but American punctuation practices are favored in that the outermost pair of quote marks is doubled ("..."), not single ('...'). It would probably be best to refrain from needless commentary unless your edits conform to Wikipedia policies. AnonMoos ( talk) 19:57, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Sorry about that edit.. I am apparently not awake yet. Dhrm77 ( talk) 14:13, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Sapphorain, no problem with your revert on Jacques Balmat and Horace Bénédict de Saussure, as I did not know the issues around their non-Swiss nationality. However, they sit inside "Category:Mountain climbers" (and not in any of its sub-categories, so others may made the same mistake I did. You might think about making a new sub-category of Mountain climbers, or, leaving a note beside the categories to remind future editors of their nationality status. thanks. 78.18.249.143 ( talk) 13:09, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
You recently reverted an addition to the article Riemann hypothesis. You were probably right to do so, as the wording was unclear and the sourcing wasn't great. But I believe the formula is correct and can be made precise with an error term rather than ≈. The W is Lambert's W function. - CRGreathouse ( t | c) 20:59, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jauerback dude?/ dude. 19:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
@ Sapphorain: Hello. I've noticed you have been recently removing the Category:American Freemasons from a number of articles, with the edit summary explaining that they were unsourced. I've noticed that a number of the articles you've done this with do in fact source the claim of the subject of the article being a Freemason. For instance, on the article Ben H. Brown Jr., the fact is sourced with the link to the Political Graveyard. Same thing with the article Frederick M. Alger Jr. Is there something I'm missing here? RoundSquare ( talk) 21:27, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Dear Friend, it is stressed in Wikipedia that information should not be deleted. In case of doubt it is better to ask for a footnote instead of deleting the category, twice to that! If you don't know something, it does not mean the person who was adding the information did not know what he/she was doing. The entry has been expanded by the information in the text with two footnotes.
Ivonna Nowicka ( talk) 15:44, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Protestants from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 21:00, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Bankers from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:44, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Philanthropists from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:46, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Geographers from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:46, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Merchants from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:51, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Expatriates from the Principality of Neuchâtel in Portugal has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:53, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Explorers from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:54, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
A wider discussion has opened on other Neuchatel categories. You may want to contribute to that one. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 06:44, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (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. Willthacheerleader18 ( talk) 15:36, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Aoidh (
talk) 19:14, 2 January 2024 (UTC)https://www.lfm.ch/actualite/suisse/record-de-temperature-a-geneve-pour-un-mois-davril-plus-de-28/ 2A02:1210:5408:A000:F460:21DE:ABB9:F447 ( talk) 06:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Augustine Prevost is born in Geneva, Switzerland from parents of Bossy, Geneva, Switzerland as Augustine Prévost.
Thanks for removing the reference to Carella's paper in August and for explaining why it is incorrect. I did something similar several months ago, but he did not understand about Omega and he put back the reference to his preprint. (Carella has many preprints on the arXiv claiming proofs of famous conjectures, but he has no published papers.) Jsondow ( talk) 14:29, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your recent comments on my talk page. You are right! Jsondow ( talk) 21:37, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Carella has finally managed to publish a paper! It is "Least Prime Primitive Roots", freely available at [1] for downloading. Please let me know if you find a mistake. Thanks! Jsondow ( talk) 21:07, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your interest! For his reference to Montgomery and Vaughan 19, p. 55 see [2]. For his Hardy and Wright reference 11, p. 473 see sections 22.10 and 22.11 in the 5th edition. I don't have the other two references. I hope you can locate them. For Cojocaru and Murty try searching in [3]. Jsondow ( talk) 03:15, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Good point! Why not send the International Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science a note rebutting Carella's paper? Jsondow ( talk) 16:48, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback, I replied on my talk page. Feel free to make further adjustments in the article. -- Bobak ( talk) 16:07, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Did you even read the talk page after I reverted you again? Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 07:34, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this sentence? -- 50.53.60.41 ( talk) 17:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
What does your edit summary mean "No, Mémoires de l'Académie Impériale des Sciences de St. Pétersbourg, vol. 7, pp.17-33, 1850". Are you claiming that source does not exist? Spinning Spark 20:54, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
For crying out loud keep the conversation in one place.
Please avoid labelling as vandalism the cancellation of a paragraph whose content has nothing to do with the title of it. I have deleted it because, contrary to what is claimed in the text, the paper reviewed there has nothing to do with an attempt, of any nature, to prove the Riemann hypothesis. Just giving a further conjecture which would imply the Riemann Hypothesis is by no means a sufficient motivation to be called an attempt of proving the Riemann hypothesis, more especially if nobody has ever tried to prove that conjecture after it was stated, as it happens to be the case. Columns17 ( talk) 15:41, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Just a heads up, since you reverted Karak1lc1k's last edit. I found a journal source for Azeri Turkish and have added it to the article. Thanks. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 18:49, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you reverted my 2 previous edits to this article with regards to abuse of notation. I think the abuse is quite obvious since the = isn't an equivalence relation. I also think it's good to remind people of this since it's quite frstrating to see = meaning element of, subset, equals all at the same time. But since you seem to disagree I'd like to know your views on this matter. Cheers! Smk65536 ( talk) 21:28, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Hey why did you delete the paragraph explaining the relation between infinity symbol and Möbius sign? Nisankoc ( talk) 15:08, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Marjane Satrapi was a guest at Santa Barbara City College and invited by Prof. Manoutchehr Eskandari-Qajar. Asked by him about her Qajar lineage she said she did not know. First she claimed to be a descendant of Soltan Ahmad Shah, later of Nasser ed-Din Shah. Of both men we have a list of descendants in a registry of the Kadjar Family Association; she is not mentioned in it and her family is not known with the descendants of Nasser ed-Din Shah. When we asked her first cousin (Satrapi) about a Qajar lineage, he informed us he did not know of any. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darakeh ( talk • contribs) 07:44, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
OK, what is the time frame we are talking about? I am the genealogist of the Qajar Family (Association) and editor-in-chief of Qajar Studies. It is annoying to have false claims, especially when a person claims to be your relative, while that person is not know in the family. It is nothing personal against Marjane, the opposite, she is a very talented lady; but truth should prevail! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:980:1A19:1:448D:B04E:CD7D:191 ( talk) 08:55, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Hi, the genealogy of the family on the websites referred to in the link you just sent ( Kadscharen website / Qajars website ) are in my hands. IQSA have had conferences held and annual journals published for the last 15 years. We have an elaborate family database, which is kept up-to-date constantly. In the board of the Qajar Family Association I am responsible for memberships and I have all the genealogies of the different branches under my care. Kindest regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:980:1A19:1:448D:B04E:CD7D:191 ( talk) 10:23, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank You! I really do hope a serious source IS offered, because it is always better to gain relatives than to loose them .......... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:980:1A19:1:448D:B04E:CD7D:191 ( talk) 13:05, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello. You're free to add his burial place if you find a proper reliable source for it, but you cannot add it if it's only sourced to a non-RS user-contributed web site, a site that is also being actively spammed. Thomas.W talk 20:18, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Why did you revert the latest version on the Numa Pompilius page? It clarifies what legends it's talking about. Is there a particular reason you like the original wording so much? Perfect Orange Sphere ( talk) 16:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Hallo, WP:OPENPARA, a guideline of wikipedia, is absolutely clear about the nationality that should appear on the lead.
"if (the person is) notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national or permanent resident when the person became notable."
Now, Lagrange became notable when he was still in Turin (the king of Prussia in his invitation to Berlin called him the foremost mathematician in Europe), reached the apogee of his fame in Berlin, then went to Paris, where among others he became French citizen. Notability was reached in Italy, so only the Italian nationality should be mentioned in the opening paragraph (not elsewhere, of course). I know that this rule is not optimal, but has the advantage to be clear and precise, and as a rule must be followed. In other cases (f.e. at Riccardo Giacconi, Richard Rogers, Andrew Viterbi) I had to remove the Italian nationality from the lead. If you don't like it, and want to introduce another rule (like the double nationality, which I can approve) please open a thread on the discussion page of the manual of style. Otherwise, at your next revert I will be forced to open a thread at ANI. Thanks, Alex2006 ( talk) 16:40, 22 March 2016 (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. I'm distressed to see you jumping to calling a perfectly reasonable quote by Alessandro "dishonest" above. [8] Please show other editors respect . Bishonen | talk 15:27, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi
Updated info rather than another revert. It's the world's largest by area, joint 18th (not 10th) by leasable retail space. Best, Alexandermcnabb ( talk) 10:03, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
The classical proof of Lagrange's sum of four squares theorem seems to be missing something. ie it contains "Similarly, for b taking ..." with no previous mention of b. A quick glance at another website shows more. Is there a chunk of text missing? JohnOliverZ ( talk) 08:34, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
If you have a problem with the edits to the graphic design section on the Infinity symbol article use the Talk page to discuss them. Looking through your User talk page, I can see that you have been warned about edit wars before. Please refer to the January 2016 warning above. Looks like you have also been accused multiple times of being belligerent to other editors. Perhaps you should remember that Wikipedia is not just a platform for your own personal opinions. CrocodilesAreForWimps ( talk) 19:13, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I've explained several times that the content you twice restored is a blatant copyright violation. I've requested further assistance here [9]. Please feel free to comment. Thanks, 2601:188:1:AEA0:64A2:63B:81A0:A51F ( talk) 15:17, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Looks like you missed the link in the edit summary for the IP editors copyrighted content removal. It's pretty clearly a copyright violation. I've removed the content again. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns about my revert. Best wishes. Waggie ( talk) 16:08, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello. I don't particularly care which era system is used in articles; but as far as I know, the constraints and terms of WP:ERA still apply. Could you please give me a link to the Wikipedia policy or consensus that overides it in this particular case? Thanks, Haploidavey ( talk) 21:13, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I want to inform you recently, I edited the List of Prime Ministers of Iran and corrected its mistakes. I hope you find it useful. Best regards. Shfarshid ( talk) 02:14, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for being a hero of disruption, in removing perfectly neutral and most likely correct information, as you did in this edit. If we only had more editors like you, Wikipedia would contain so much less information, and wouldn't that be good? I haven't seen the likes of your edit in productiveness in the longest time. Must be hard, to be such an active contributor to this encyclopedia. Debresser ( talk) 23:25, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
The reversion was explained as "Hazy assertion, certainly inappropriate in the lead". Would you like this statement clarified further and placed somewhere else? Or is this article not the appropriate place to mention this? Thanks. -- Fylwind ( talk) 01:15, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
a(n) = 6n + O(log n)
. Proving that the density is 1/6 simply involves fixing a, noting that the density of the subsequence is `1/(4a × 8)`, and then summing over all a (this is where the uniqueness of a and b is needed: to prevent overlapping subsequences), which leads to a geometric sum with value 1/6. Does this sounds sensible? --
Fylwind (
talk) 00:13, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Then perhaps you could have bothered to format it correctly, which was the first reason I reverted? Too much work, I guess. In addition, it is not a reference, and it is not a note, so why is it listed when no other specific proof not referenced is listed? If it belongs anywhere, it belongs in the page on the proofs, not on the page of the theorem itself. And if it is added to the page of proofs, it needs to be summarized there, not merely dropped, badly formatted, into a random place of the article. Magidin ( talk) 02:35, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Please, go to to understand who "really" is Vituzzu ( https://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/4/42/Mewhenreadingstupidstuff.gif/revision/latest?cb=20051111042000 Vituzzu reverting BD for the 1000 time)...anyway thanks for your tentative to save information about Berytus, regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.244.42 ( talk) 14:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
I suppose you're too busy to ask for a source or just give me some time to give one. You've a despicable attitude. I'm sorry you've nothing more positive to do than removing things. Poor man, I'm really sorry for the vaccum you live in. BIRDIE ® 10:01, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
You undo the change I did. However my change was not vandalism but a correction. Just look at Riemann's paper wolfram etc. Even in the same Wikipedia page the correct formula exits in the Mellin-type integrals section. I wrote the explanation in the "Riemann zeta function" talk page. Please return my change or explain to me what was I wrong about. Adikatz ( talk) 07:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, there are more than 25 sources in List of twin towns and sister cities in China isn't in English. And a provision in Wikipedia:Verifiability: "Citations to non-English reliable sources are allowed on the English Wikipedia." I think the Chinese source is ok.-- xiliuheshui※ MESSAGE BOARD 04:01, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello. The material that was removed from the article does indeed qualify as reference spam for a number of reasons, ranging from containing inline external links that were neither needed (since we have an article about that subject here, see message on User talk:Jhansc) nor allowed here, to being added to a considerable number of articles by an editor with an obvious conflict of interest. So I suggest you trust the judgement of experienced users reverting material for being spam, even if it doesn't look like spam to you, because reference spamming is usually done in such a way that it isn't obvious to editors who look at only one or two articles, but requires seeing the full picture. Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W talk 22:23, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Just letting you know that the third opinion was officially dropped off at Talk:Patrice Lumumba. Perhaps this will help us reach consensus? - Indy beetle ( talk) 04:00, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Fisrtly, it doesn't matter if it was Switzerland at the time or not — it matters whether it's Switzerland today or not. Secondly, Category:Male writers and Category:Historians and Category:Politicians are all categories that are required to be as strictly empty of individual articles as possible — all people in them are supposed to be subcategorized on some criterion or other, with the undifferentiated parent category containing zero articles directly. Bearcat ( talk) 21:39, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Axiomus ( talk) 11:16, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi. My bad. I published my changes because of an edit conflict with you earlier which added back some of the unsourced ones. Sorry. Vaselineeeeeeee ★★★ 22:08, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Sapphorain! Thank you for all the good work that you do. I saw what you wrote in the talk page of Marie Huber, and as I have seen that you have a very understandable feeling about these categories - I have some knowledge in history myself, so I know the feeling! - I thought that I should at least give you a reply. Please remember, that I do not say this to reprimand you in any way, or try to make you adjust to any policy whatsoever: I simply though to explain, and I hope that is quite alright.
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of twin towns and sister cities in Paraguay is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of twin towns and sister cities in Paraguay until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. — Bkell ( talk) 04:37, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Galobtter ( pingó mió) 16:44, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi there
I came across this article today and I spotted the flaw in the paradox. About which I posted an update on the page earlier today. You since deleted the comment.
Please explain why you deleted it. I believe my logic is correct.
Thank you Hylton Hyltonr ( talk) 22:17, 10 May 2018 (UTC) Hyltonr ( talk) 22:17, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
So a single unreputable source is ok? I thought things had to be factually accurate? Especially when the assertion is on someone's character. How can a non-reputable source stand, on any Wikipedia article, let alone a historic figure? The reason there is only one source is because the man's life has been documented thoroughly. This assertion appears nowhere else, but here...and it is made by a historical fiction writer, without any merit. It's no different than me making an "assertion" and putting it on my website and someone citing it. How can this stand? ...(p.s. sorry for the multiple edits) Justbean ( talk) 13:49, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Can you explain why you removed Barrow, Alaska from the list of sister cities in the US even though it is listed as such on Barrow's and Ushuaia's pages ad on the official list? Blair277( talk) 15:54, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
You are deleted my contribution because source is in Polish (although many other sources are in Polish too but they still are not removed). There is nowhere any source in English in this topic (partner cities of Augustów). My source is from official site of this city's Town Hall. Why this is so unacceptable for you? KarolDz95 ( talk) 19:52, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
See: sr:Смедерево#Партнерски градови and sr:Spisak pobratimljenih gradova u Srbiji#Smederevo
See also this:
WP does not recognise Genevan as a nationality. Any more of this & it goes to CFD, where it will certainly be deleted. Johnbod ( talk) 21:49, 10 June 2018 (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. Johnbod ( talk) 23:58, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. The full report is at the edit warring noticeboard. Thank you, EdJohnston ( talk) 15:09, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
The Farey Sequence F_2 is (0,1/2,1) and the sum over F_2 will be (cos(0*2*pi) + cos(1/2*2*pi) + cos(1*2*pi) =1) which is not 0, therefore: Exclude 0. /info/en/?search=M%C3%B6bius_function
Sorry for interrupting but if you check the Gela article also, Eleusis and Gela are twinned towns based on their common history with poet Aeschylus.Thank you.Also please write a summary on your changes. AlbusTheWhite ( talk) 17:00, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
I added a citation directing to Eleusis official candidate booklet for european capital of culture mentioning that it is twinned with Gela AlbusTheWhite ( talk) 17:27, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi Sapphorain. Please could you be more cautious in removing sourced entries with out-dated links. Based on the URL and access dates provided, the original citations for North Baddesley and Plymouth were easily found on Internet Archive, so I've restored them with updated references. Even where this is not possible, the guidance at WP:BADLINK says "do not delete cited information solely because the URL to the source does not work any longer". Cheers, AJ Cham 09:37, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Sapphorain. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Good evening Sapphorain Please see the talk pages for Geneva concerning your recent reversions of my edits
ArbieP ( talk) 22:36, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Good evening Sapphorain
Please see Talk:Geneva#Citations_in_the_Notable_people_section
Thankyou ArbieP ( talk) 18:20, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Wow, you are still the most stubborn person I know on here. The same way as you did not accept your obvious error in the case of Lausanne you start now the same obvious stubborness even though I already gave you an undisputable source. You just need to read it - again! -- ZH8000 ( talk) 19:40, 11 February 2019 (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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sapphorain reported by User:ZH8000 (Result: ). Thank you. ZH8000 ( talk) 20:15, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Bbb23 (
talk) 23:27, 11 February 2019 (UTC)Dear
Sapphorain,
Thank you for sending me thanks via the Thankyou button, for
this edit. Your earlier
revert prompted me to approach our colleague
Robman94 for advice on how to upload a cropped/portrait version of the original photo. In his usual helpful way, Rob graciously took the initiative of creating a cleaner, portrait version of that photo and uploading it himself into Commons, so that all I had to do was simply link to it in the
Robert Desnos article. Therefore, I feel all thanks must really go to Rob, and I have already done that; but I also wanted to thank you for taking the time to express your appreciation for my small part in all this.
With kind regards;
Patrick. ツ
Pdebee.
(talk)(
guestbook) 20:19, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Eduard Douwes Dekker Multatuli was a free macon for sure. You might not like it but he was.
greetings J.T.W.A.Cornelisse ( talk) 19:19, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
Luschny is an amateur mathematician whose section of Bernoulli number entitled "Generalization to the odd-index Bernoulli numbers" should be removed, for the following reasons.
1. In the title, "Generalization" is not explained: generalization of what?
2. His sequence B_n is incorrect: the notation "B_n" means the usual the n-th Bernoulli number, which is zero when n > 1 is odd, but all the values of his sequence are nonzero. He needs to use a different notation, not "B_n".
Would you kindly remove this section? I am not sure how to remove it myself. Thanks. Jsondow ( talk) 16:00, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! Jsondow ( talk) 17:19, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
You continue to remove my submissions however if you look at the annual sister cities report, all of thé sister cities I added to the list are recognized by Sister Cities International Lexingtonsistercities ( talk) 03:44, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
I see the original translation as losing context on the stress placed on 'their' disregard for life. Reverse translation shows lower vector distance in favor of the edit. I am aware this is not always a good indicator, and I apologize if it doesn't check out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.64.127.128 ( talk) 06:41, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
\
I skipped by the second reference the Lumière website, because when read the website the source is HDS. That is double pointing at eachother. The first one hDS is than the source. Boss-well63 ( talk) 14:32, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Any particular reason why you undid my addition of a completely relevant category on Peter Christian Bønecke? Ramblersen2 ( talk) 00:16, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Material that is uncited and challenged is subject to deletion. You do not get to simply insert completely unreferenced material into wikipedia. This is basic. Please don't. -- 2604:2000:E010:1100:64FC:4B20:C241:B249 ( talk) 02:57, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
You needed me to revise this. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mie_Prefecture It's not only a sister city, but sister regions in general. Aklearoth ( talk) 09:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Riemann hypothesis shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Frankly, it is difficult to distinguish your behavior there from trolling. -- JBL ( talk) 20:30, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
I must have fat-fingered something on my IPad. It was never my intention to revert you. Terribly sorry for the inconvenience. Kleuske ( talk) 07:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Naruhito, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DrKay ( talk) 18:18, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Sapphorain, I invite you to engage in a discussion at Talk:Calvin Coolidge#"Served as" vs. "was" to avoid further ping-pong on this choice of language. Let's see if we can develop a consensus through discussion. Cheers, HopsonRoad ( talk) 22:19, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
If you have found better sources, good, but please add one of them to the article to back up your findings. Deb ( talk) 09:02, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
I dont think there are enough articles about Genevan scientists to divide into different sciences. You have left Jean-André Deluc in Category:Swiss geologists but taken out the 18th century. That doesnt seem very logical. Do you think its unacceptable to call him Swiss? He appears to have worked in Switzerland - and other places - not just in Geneva. As far as scientists go their place of operation is more significant than their place of birth. Rathfelder ( talk) 08:02, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Ask yourself, did your repeated pressing of revert, and doing nothing else help here? Please do not contact me further. 89.107.6.68 ( talk) 22:35, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Frances Bavier: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. POLITANVM talk 21:23, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
I agree totally. The 40-character limit on short descriptions usually results in something that at best is so terse as to be pointless and at worst, seriously misleading. I have tried but failed to challenge this asinine policy, see Wikipedia talk:Short description/Archive 9#Length – 40 or 90 characters??. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 00:57, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
When you tag articles as [citation needed], especially articles that have already recently passed a Good Article review, can you at least put some effort into making sure that the footnotes already present in the article, immediately following the claim you are unsure about in the same paragraph, do not already provide a reference for exactly the material that you are questioning? Thanks! — David Eppstein ( talk) 22:32, 28 March 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. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Sapphorain reported by User:2804:248:F666:900:44BF:96AB:C7A9:2D03 (Result: ). Thank you. Mr Eat ( talk) 23:26, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Apparently the creator of the map made a website explaining it, it is down but fortunately there is an archived version:
https://web.archive.org/web/20191202005150/http://www.high-castle-world-map.com:80/
What's your opinion of it? -- 2804:248:f65c:9c00:e9a7:78b:55e8:dd75 ( talk) 21:33, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
Regarding this edit, the Republic of Geneva ended in 1798 (with a very brief reestablishment in 1813-1815). This person was obviously known as a Swiss theologian, not as a Genevan Reublican theologian. Marcocapelle ( talk) 15:21, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
"Bring the Jubilee" is a U.S.-topic article, so by MOS:ENGVAR the spelling "scrutinized" with a Z should be used, not "scrutinised" with a S. Also, as you can read in other sections of the Wikipedia Manual of Style, British punctuation practices are favored in that quote marks are in their "logical" positions (not reversed with other punctuation marks), but American punctuation practices are favored in that the outermost pair of quote marks is doubled ("..."), not single ('...'). It would probably be best to refrain from needless commentary unless your edits conform to Wikipedia policies. AnonMoos ( talk) 19:57, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Sorry about that edit.. I am apparently not awake yet. Dhrm77 ( talk) 14:13, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Sapphorain, no problem with your revert on Jacques Balmat and Horace Bénédict de Saussure, as I did not know the issues around their non-Swiss nationality. However, they sit inside "Category:Mountain climbers" (and not in any of its sub-categories, so others may made the same mistake I did. You might think about making a new sub-category of Mountain climbers, or, leaving a note beside the categories to remind future editors of their nationality status. thanks. 78.18.249.143 ( talk) 13:09, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
You recently reverted an addition to the article Riemann hypothesis. You were probably right to do so, as the wording was unclear and the sourcing wasn't great. But I believe the formula is correct and can be made precise with an error term rather than ≈. The W is Lambert's W function. - CRGreathouse ( t | c) 20:59, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jauerback dude?/ dude. 19:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
@ Sapphorain: Hello. I've noticed you have been recently removing the Category:American Freemasons from a number of articles, with the edit summary explaining that they were unsourced. I've noticed that a number of the articles you've done this with do in fact source the claim of the subject of the article being a Freemason. For instance, on the article Ben H. Brown Jr., the fact is sourced with the link to the Political Graveyard. Same thing with the article Frederick M. Alger Jr. Is there something I'm missing here? RoundSquare ( talk) 21:27, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Dear Friend, it is stressed in Wikipedia that information should not be deleted. In case of doubt it is better to ask for a footnote instead of deleting the category, twice to that! If you don't know something, it does not mean the person who was adding the information did not know what he/she was doing. The entry has been expanded by the information in the text with two footnotes.
Ivonna Nowicka ( talk) 15:44, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Category:Protestants from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 21:00, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Bankers from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:44, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Philanthropists from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:46, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Geographers from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:46, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Merchants from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:51, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Expatriates from the Principality of Neuchâtel in Portugal has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:53, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Category:Explorers from the Principality of Neuchâtel has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason ( talk) 00:54, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
A wider discussion has opened on other Neuchatel categories. You may want to contribute to that one. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 06:44, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed 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 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (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. Willthacheerleader18 ( talk) 15:36, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Aoidh (
talk) 19:14, 2 January 2024 (UTC)https://www.lfm.ch/actualite/suisse/record-de-temperature-a-geneve-pour-un-mois-davril-plus-de-28/ 2A02:1210:5408:A000:F460:21DE:ABB9:F447 ( talk) 06:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)