Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This 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. |
I notice you removed the {{db-transwiki}} tag from Urban Indian. That entry already exists at Wiktionary:Urban Indian, so wouldn't the {{db-transwiki}} tag be valid? =Axlq 20:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
The redirect from obecalp to placebo was legitimate IMHO. Obecalp, or "placebo" spelled backwards, is actually used by some physicians to refer to a placebo. See etymology section in the article. I suggest restoring the redirect, or at least discussing this. See also . Cheers, --Edcolins (talk) 23:34, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Why was the page deleted?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fawzi_AL-Hammouri MaD (talk) 18:26, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for simplifying my comments on the light sculpture! Well done! Allyn (talk) 08:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
First off, I apologize for the spam. You are receiving this message because you have indicated that you are in Southern California or interested in Southern California topics (either via category or WikiProject).
I would like to invite you to the Los Angeles edition of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art, a photography scavenger hunt to be held at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) on Saturday, February 28, 2009, from 1:00 to 7:00 PM. All photos are intended for use in Wikipedia articles or on Wikimedia Commons. There will be a prize available for the person who gets the most photos on the list.
If you don't like art, why not come just to meet your fellow Wikipedians. Apparently, we haven't had a meetup in this area since June 2006!
If you are interested in attending, please add your name to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art#Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Please make a note if you are traveling to the area (train or plane) and need transportation, which can probably be arranged via carpool, but we need time to coordinate. Lodging is as of right now out of scope, but we could discuss that if enough people are interested.
Thank you and I hope to see you there! howcheng {chat} 23:44, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
David, you wouldn’t have at atmospheric photo for the European Symposium on Algorithms floating around? Thore Husfeldt (talk) 09:02, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for unprotecting. Sandstein seems to think it's a can of worms, but the subject has plenty of coverage. Anyway, I think the concepts and considerations related to the term are interesting. I wrote it up based on the sources, so it actually has a stronger assertion of present relevance than I think reasonable, but rules are rules. I think it's more interesting as a concept and perspective on political relations a la Close Encounters of the Third Kind and other sci-fi conceptualizations. Anyway, I hope you won't get in any trouble for being the one to unprotect. I don't mind people thinking I'm kookie. I don't find these stories and mythologies any less crazy than reality. They're heeeeeeeeeeeeeere! :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:42, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I saw that you have deleted the Kenshin user (who has no contributions). Is it possible for me to change my username to Kenshin? Thanks! AKoan (talk) 10:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed you recently deleted the formula I contributed in 2004 or 2005 to the Wikipedia:Pythagorean triple article, because it was an "obfuscated attempt" to represent the equation with a single variable. I created the original Platonic Triangle entry which was later merged into Pythagorean triple with that equation. I believe the addition still has merit, as the equation is the simplest possible representation of the composite of the two functions, and is quite helpful for studying the sequence over all natural numbers. Do you have any suggestions on how I should reformat this to reinsert into the article?
Syncomm (talk) 17:46, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Any suggestions what to do about this article? See the "bogosity" note on the talk page. Best place to answer is probably over there. 207.241.239.70 (talk) 08:24, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Got a cite of the International you mention? LeadSongDog (talk) 17:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
About the link between combinatorial maps and rotation system.
I do not known the term "rotation system" before today, thanks for the link. However, combinatoral maps are define in n-dimension. I have cited in the page combinatoral maps the original definition which is the same than rotation system, but this is just to link with original works. Indeed, the main interest of combinatorial maps is the general definition in nD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guillaume Damiand (talk • contribs) 19:44, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Only three students are in the classroom and the lecture is dragging on. While the professor turns to the blackboard to write a long formula, five students slip away. The professor turns to the class and says disappointedly: “If two latecomers walk in, there'll be nobody left!” ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:52, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I don't understand why the page for Greg Prato has been deleted. He has a book coming out via ECW Press in April (in addition to the 2 books that he self-published). He also is a long-time writer for Allmusic and other sites and magazines - do a search on Yahoo and see how many of his reviews and articles come up. Thanks, Skybleu6
He has written many magazine articles for Classic Rock Magazine, Total Guitar Magazine, Record Collector Magazine, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skybleu6 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
I just put up a post on WP:DRV. Skybleu6 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skybleu6 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Good afternoon
Today I have seen that in my article there is a problem (please look) --- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolai_Shmatko
I am the author of this article. It is article about the Ukrainian sculptor (living on Ukraine)
If to speak about Shmatko he is known in Ukraine. What should I change in article?
I cannot understand that mean these marks in article. Help me to solve this problem.
I am the author of article placed on his site http://www.kingofmarble-shmatko.com/engver/Bioexe2.html , I have the right to use materials from the page of the biography this site.
I thank YOU for your answer.
Rafael —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rerter 2 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer! Thanks for explanations, this article was addition to my article in Russianabou Shmatko.
It is difficult for me to understand, that marks concerning his date of a birth and not only institute are made. I saw a mark concerning his award for work for Laurels and have not understood, what documents it is necessary for the proof. In our country the law on the copyright works. It works from the moment of creation of work of art and we do not require registration of it. If you will searh in google many words, you cannot see result - not all organizations have the sites in English. In our countries the newspaper and magazines write articles and the basic information in Russian and the Ukrainian language. All information is easier to do search in Russian and you can see results. If you would like to check up the data, it is desirable to make official (written) inquiry to a management of institute, I think, you know it. I understand this YOUR right to remove this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rerter 2 (talk • contribs) 05:10, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I have seen a lot of information in Russian. I have found many interesting articles, but in a basis it is new articles. You can see last videoreportings on the central channels.
http://www.dt.ua/3000/3680/63562/
http://www.umoloda.kiev.ua/number/388/119/14020/
http://news.lugansk.info/2007/lugansk/07/13859.shtml
http://www.ut.net.ua/art/169/0/123/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ukrainian/inpictures/story/2008/09/080929_gallery_27sep.shtml page 12
http://www.golos.com.ua/article/1213881349.html
http://mincult.kmu.gov.ua/mincult/uk/publish/article/120125;jsessionid=A3793CF2CFF203292801A49E77139FE3?mustWords=%D1%96%D0%BD%D1%84&searchPublishing=1
http://www.day.kiev.ua/4401/
http://www.stroyrec.com.ua/document.php?id=2753
video tv:
http://www.k1.tv/uk/news/ukraine/2009/01/07/sculpture
http://www.vybory.novy.tv/reporter/ukraine/2007/08/14/19/21.html
http://tsn.ua/ua/glamur/skandali/u-lugansku-yuliyu-timoshenko-pobachili-povnistyu-goloyu-foto.html
http://www.stb.ua/newsv.php?item.16640
http://www.24tv.com.ua/ukraine/2008-02-09/6708.htm
I understand, to prove importance of the person in art very difficultly, especially if he lives today. In these articles it is mentioned his creative lives and the some periods. Certainly, it is impossible to find all official documents in press. In different newspapers it is possible to hear partial mentions. Is it possible to refer on the document (paper), for example in family archive or on what to refer about date of a birth?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Rerter 2 (talk • contribs) 06:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer!
I shall start with top of clause. I want to ask you to help me. What the information I should give in this place of clause? --- Nicolai Shmatko was born on 17th of August 1943 in Donetsk region, Ukraine.[citation needed]--- I cannot understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rerter 2 (talk • contribs) 07:42, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rerter 2 (talk • contribs) 08:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you merged the history of this; it will just need to be split back out when the station is completed and the article is written. --NE2 17:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of that! :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 18:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Thank you for deleting that article I made User: HannahMiley, I noticed that someone with no account on here edited it back in December 2008 and put I'm a bad singer and don't know why people like my music. I don't even sing. So Thanks again. HannahMiley (talk)
Hi, just wondering why the article "Haggy" was deleted, and what gives you the authority to do so? I find it quite frightening that out of over millions of articles, you were able to find and request deletion of the article within 4 hours of creation. Please also realize people dedicate a considerable amount of effort and time to articles from their busy schedules. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HaggyTheMagnificent (talk • contribs) 19:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I shall proceed to talk to NawlinWiki, thanks and no hard feelings! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.206.162.68 (talk) 23:57, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, the context ought to suppress thoughts of avoirdupois, but fair 'nuff, and you've caught nearly all the usages too. I couldn't work out how to cause a subscript "2" to manifest though a superscript "2" was available via a special character. Previous usage of log_2 had generated obtrusively large bold text, as in the initial usages towards the head of the article (and with the round-up symbols known only to a few) in the "Examples" and I don't see why. Your alterations achieved the right result without strain. Though the rendition on a low-resolution device such as a screen (about ninety dots per inch) is not well done, but slapdash typography is the style of the internet. Kerning and ligatures are forgotten, it seems. And I'm irked by the use of blank lines rather than indentation at the start of a paragraph too. And... Oops! Enough!NickyMcLean (talk) 19:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, James Matador, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Matador. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Handrem (talk • contribs) 03:19, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey David, just wanted to thank you for the correction on the Overturned speedy deletion entry on Greg Prato. I apologize if my incomplete impressions misrepresented the case, I'm trying my best to be neutral. Thanks again. Dcoetzee 10:29, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, this article was created today, I did some cleanup, but perhaps you could have a look to see whether this person (a mathematician) is notable enough. Thanks. --Crusio (talk) 18:19, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
I added a link to her obit, if you want to read the full text. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed you have recently closed AfD debate(s) early and would like to direct you to a discussion currently in progress at the administrators noticeboard here relevent to the early closures of AfDs. Thankyou and happy editing! Sorry if you are already aware of this discussion. Foxy Loxy Pounce! 02:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
You recently removed the speedy deletion template from The Best Of The Hamiltonization Process because the artists page exists, but this article is a mixtape, not an album, and according to WP:NALBUMS, mixtapes are not notable without significant coverage. -- Darth Mike (join the dark side) 05:54, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Isn't this article eligible for A7 speedy deletion because it is about unremarkable web content? Or is this intended to only mean websites? Thanks. XenocideTalk|Contributions 13:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello David, please help--I'm trying to learn math (haha) and thought I'd start with set theory, but I have a nagging suspicion that there is a grammatical mistake in the second paragraph, in this sentence: "For instance; three cups on a table when spoken of together as "the cups", or the chalk lines on a board in the form of the opening and closing curly bracket symbols along with any other symbols in between the two bracket symbols." Would you mind having a look? Thanks, your math-challenged fellow WPer, Drmies (talk) 02:46, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Ouch! This IP address called you a C-student! I'm sure your feelings are hurt, so let me just say, a C doesn't disallow you from becoming president (of your neighborhood association, for instance). ;) Drmies (talk) 21:21, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your review. I've added some questions for you so that I can understand in specific what may be done to address your issues. -- Avi (talk) 03:13, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
I've marked Hadwiger conjecture (graph theory) with a cleanup tag and commented on the talk page. Can you clarify? Michael Hardy (talk) 07:03, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
David, the anon is right, G(16) is at least 64. For, the 16-th power of an odd number is , the 16-th power of even numbers is divisible by 128, so all numbers divisible by 64 but not by 128 require 64 16-th powers. The same argument gives that if N is a power of 2, and is at least 4. Kope (talk) 21:18, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Creator of article has had user and talk pages deleted; so I'm posting the notice here as per template. After spending a lot of time trying to edit the problems in this article, I discovered that it appears to be plagiarized from a copyright-protected source. See EL section that I added just prior to discovering that. Thanks. --NYScholar (talk) 03:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Champika Liyanaarachchi, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.cjaweb.com/index.pl/article?id=91222, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.
If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), versions 1.3 or later then you should do one of the following:
It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Champika Liyanaarachchi saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! NYScholar (talk) 03:41, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
The other possibility is that the CJA cribbed it from Wikipedia or another Wiki and did not acknowledge the Wiki as the source--feedback loop possibility. --NYScholar (talk) 03:43, 12 February 2009 (UTC) There is, however, both an author credited and a copyright notice at the bottom of the webpage that suggests the first possiblity may be more likely. --NYScholar (talk) 03:44, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
John McKay (the group theorist) has made a number of strange edits, always as an IP editor as far as I know, often from Japan. I usually move them to the talk page. Brendan McKay (the graph theorist) is User:McKay I believe, and usually edits logged in. JackSchmidt (talk) 05:37, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Your issue is raised at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Some_wikihounding_going_on. THF (talk) 11:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
I provided a reliable source. TH said it was inappropriate for lack of source, read the talk. No more reverting without justification! Don't draw me into an edit war, I'm tired of this professor. Wikifan12345 (talk) 03:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Dear 'computer colleague" David Eppstein, please bcan you explain your sentence:
"Boubaker to promote himself inappropriately as the discoverer of something that he didn't discover"? Thanks.Etaittunpe (talk) 22:45, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Dear colleague, I told I am your colleague, you can easily check that my IP is from Romania, (if you want me to give you emeil, or telephone , OK) your sentense is from that page ,you posted it yesterday, 05:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
So can you kindly explain this sentence??
Thank you Etaittunpe (talk) 23:20, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
"Boubaker polynomials", are the same thing as Chebyshev polynomials??? are you sure ?? any hit in google can give you tens of publicatioins on Boubaker polynomials (some publication are on compaison between the two polynomials....) please clear this, perhaps you are not well informed??Etaittunpe (talk) 00:51, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, what does disingenious mean? Etaittunpe (talk) 02:13, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
I pretended nothing, but I really ignore why you erased my comment from its place :
CommentWould you change your mind if there are 30 peer-reviewed sources involving more than 30 authors from more than 11 countries ??? Just say Yes or No to save time?
in the discussion page ??Etaittunpe (talk) 03:11, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Would you kindly allow me undo this act??
Hi. As you were involved in some of the recent discussion and debate about the images in the article on Intelligent design, I thought you might like to know a separate proceeding was brought to try to remove the Time image by outright deletion from the wiki . It's at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2009_February_12#Time_evolution_wars.jpg . If you are at all interested in the issue, it would be reasonable to post a "keep" or a "delete" at that page. .. ... Kenosis (talk) 06:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey there friend. I know you've now taken it to AfD, but for future reference software doesn't come under the A7 criteria. We are very strict about this and usually reject such speedy deletions unless they also come under a different criterion (Advertising, for instance). Thanks!--Pattont/c 13:54, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I signed in to my account today to realize you tagged my user page for deletion. I was creating an entry for Mainebiz, a business newspaper in Maine. I was under the impression the user page was a good place for people to work on and edit pages before submitting them for inclusion in Wikipedia. Your note on my page says it was deleted because it's blatant advertising, which I strongly disagree with. Nothing in the entry was boostery at all. It was just facts presented about the company and its place as Maine's only business news publication. If you delete that entry, please also delete the Wikipedia entries for the following, as they are blatant advertising: The New York Times, the Chicago Tribune, Crain Communications Inc., American City Business Journals, the Orlando Business Journal, Hemmings Motor News. If these publications have Wikipedia entries, then Mainebiz deserves its entry. Even you have a personal Wikipedia entry -- advertising yourself are you? Please fix this injustice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Badarchin (talk • contribs) 21:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your supportive comments. The WP:Article Rescue Squadron really works hard to improve articles. I even notified a Mr. Universe a few weeks ago, and had a half hour conversation with him. the AfD was withdrawn, and the article was kept. today i notified a gay and lesbian organization asking for sources, and a week ago I notified a church for the same reason. Thank you again for your kind words. Ikip (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
I thought this article might interest you. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your edit summary. Concern over the material was expressed here also. Ty 09:41, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
You wrote in talk:combinatorial proof that you "could find no reliable source for the claim that such proofs are commonly referred to via this phrase." Please note that I did not claim that they are commonly referred to by this phrase; what I do assert is that they have been referred to that way. And, more to the point, I also wrote (in my last comment on that page) of my view that "the informal comment merits retention in the article because the simile provides a useful analogy to help people understand the idea behind the proof technique."
I don't imagine you're looking for a notarized affidavit that I have heard the term used as I described. And anyway, I think that assiduously documenting prior usage misses the point: would you be satisfied if I wrote merely that one way to think of this approach is as a Jeopardy! proof?—PaulTanenbaum (talk) 17:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing out that Grünbaum's definition of a convex polytope, as a compact convex set, is equivalent to the convex hull definition. Given the importance of Grünbaum's book, would it be worth while making this point in the article?
Also, I notice that the relevant section uses "representation" and "definition" interchangeably in the text, which I find unhelpful. Would you have any objection to sticking to one of these throughout, say "definition"?
-- Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 14:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Yesterday I wrote here, "If there is any reason to retain the section in this article, please let us know what it is!". Since you are so keen to retain the section, I would be grateful if you could give some justification in that discussion. -- Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 21:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.