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. |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bucket queue you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Colin M -- Colin M (talk) 00:21, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Viète's formula you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 08:40, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Viète's formula you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Viète's formula for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 20:00, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pick's theorem you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Horsesizedduck -- Horsesizedduck (talk) 15:01, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Pick's theorem you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pick's theorem for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Horsesizedduck -- Horsesizedduck (talk) 17:02, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey, while perusing the orphaned files category, I came across a number of, er, interesting files uploaded by Knecht03. It looks like you reverted many of his edits at associative magic square as OR/cruft/not encyclopedic back in 2019 - not sure if it rings a bell. In any case, much of his content remains at most-perfect magic square, magic constant, and water retention on mathematical surfaces, and I thought I should check if it should also be removed. Also, should his image uploads also be deleted as unencyclopedic/OR, or are they worth porting to Commons on the off chance someone will want them? I can take care of the tag spree if so, but I figured I should check with someone who might actually know first. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:22, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Euclid–Euler theorem you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Horsesizedduck -- Horsesizedduck (talk) 16:41, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi, regards Alan Cobham (mathematician), unlike AfD where WP:BEFORE is essential, at AfC it is deemed the responsibility of the submitter (or anyone else) to show notability. A single blog did not show notability - You may have noticed the "subject obviously passes WP:PROF" because it is your area, but at AfC we have to review every topic. As the decline notice says, it just didn't yet show notability not that the subject was not notable. With 200+ submissions a day and few reviewers if we WP:BEFOREd every draft we though could be notable the backlog would be even more than 5 months which is already ridiculous and those not lucky enough to have submission noticed by someone like yourself with expertise would be waiting more than a year. As I see from your user page your focused on mathematics articles you may like to look at the pending submissions in Wikipedia:AfC sorting/STEM/Mathematics or any other subject in Wikipedia:AfC sorting you like to look at. Obviously any editor is welcome to just move an article from draft to main-space that the believe is notable, but if you'd like to put your expertise to use in getting worthy articles from AfC submission please do consider signing up an Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants and using WP:AFCH to accept articles (includes basic cleanup, logging, and thanking submitter) - we really appreciate any reviewers with expertise in key areas even if they only review the odd article. If interested we also have Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/List of reviewers by subject so you can log your areas of expertise and interest. Although I disagree it was obviously notable based on just a blog I do very much appreciate you noting it, improving it and getting it main-spaced. All the best KylieTastic (talk) 21:40, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Euclid–Euler theorem you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Euclid–Euler theorem for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Horsesizedduck -- Horsesizedduck (talk) 14:01, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Viète's formula you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Viète's formula for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 18:02, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Euclid–Euler theorem you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Euclid–Euler theorem for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Horsesizedduck -- Horsesizedduck (talk) 18:02, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
On 7 July 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Didi Contractor, which you created. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 21:49, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi David, thanks for the fast reply on the orphan tag. I have a question about the change you made for the article: "search engine results are not reliable sources". If Google scholar and Google patents are not considered relaible sources, can you recommend alternative (preferably free) sources for academic publication and patents?--Adig-pt (talk) 07:32, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Bucket queue you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bucket queue for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Colin M -- Colin M (talk) 23:02, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | |
Thanks for providing valuable advice to the people completing my task over at the Reward Board! 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk, FAQ, contribs | please use {{ping}} on reply) 20:48, 13 July 2021 (UTC) |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cairo pentagonal tiling you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:40, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Halin graph you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 01:41, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Halin graph you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Halin graph for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 16:40, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Cairo pentagonal tiling you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Cairo pentagonal tiling for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 18:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Cairo pentagonal tiling you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cairo pentagonal tiling for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 18:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
The article Halin graph you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Halin graph for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Some Dude From North Carolina -- Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 18:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
On 23 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Viète's formula, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1593, French amateur mathematician François Viète found the first formula in European mathematics to represent an infinite process, a product of square roots that he used to compute π? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Viète's formula. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Viète's formula), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Women in Red | August 2021, Volume 7, Issue 8, Numbers 184, 188, 204, 205, 206, 207
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:24, 23 July 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
A) See also items do not need to be directly related. See MOS B) The article discusses vertices and splits. So the proposed See also item is in fact related even if written as mathematics rather than computer graphics. The one field is a subset of the other C) Revert is not a polite way to ask a question. I have a user page for that Elinruby (talk) 07:33, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Hmmm. I am not sure you are right but I am entertaining the possibility that you know more than I. I suppose it is possible, but mathematically, a vertex is a vertex regardless of where it is found, no? I have not reverted you in turn, just in case, but I currently believe you are mistaken. I already went back to a current news article though, so I will get back to you on this. Probably with more questions, if you are saying you are a subject matter expert. Elinruby (talk) 07:52, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
On 25 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pick's theorem, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that for polygons with integer coordinates, the area can be computed from the numbers of integer points inside and on the boundary of the polygon? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pick's theorem. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Pick's theorem), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 25 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)
Hi David. I see that you've been active on the DFA minimization article. I've just added a question on the Talk page there: perhaps I have spotted a bug (but perhaps I'm missing something obvious). You might be interested. Thanks for your time. PhS (talk) 17:11, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
On 31 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Euclid–Euler theorem, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after Euclid proved that every Mersenne prime leads to an even perfect number, it took more than 2000 years before Leonhard Euler proved that every even perfect number comes from a Mersenne prime? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Euclid–Euler theorem. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Euclid–Euler theorem), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
I did my PhD with Florian Luca as advisor, who has hundreds of articles published about diophantine equations and he uses the term to refer to any type of diophantine equations, not just polynomials. It could be a bias from him, but a quick search on Google Scholar also gives articles referring to non-polynomial equations by the term, including some from Erdös. Crisófilax (talk) 03:50, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
On 2 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cairo pentagonal tiling, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Cairo pentagonal tiling was a favorite pattern of M. C. Escher? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cairo pentagonal tiling. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cairo pentagonal tiling), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
On 4 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Halin graph, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when a tree is a star, connecting its leaves in a cycle makes a wheel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Halin graph. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Halin graph), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hello there! I thought the description over at Collatz conjecture seemed a bit wordy, so I changed it based on what I thought a shortdesc should be. I was incorrect. Here is how you responded to my making a wrong edit:
Your new shortdesc violates WP:SDNOTDEF by providing zero information beyond what is already in the title. Don't do that. If you don't understand the topic well enough to provide an INFORMATIVE shortdesc, don't touch it.
I think what you wrote was tactless and unconstructive, and I think that was a poor way of handling what was a simple mistake. I really don't mind–people write in this tone on the internet all the time, and you didn't hurt my feelings or anything. No harm, no foul. However, I think you should consider when it's advantageous to use that tone, and when it's more useful to save it for when it's truly necessary. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 01:50, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
The main snag seems to be the concern you expressed i.e. as proposed, whether we're in backlog mode is tested at the moment of main-page appearance, which can lead to a surprise a month after you made the nomination. How would you feel about the following?
This way people know at nomination time whether they need to do one or two. As I mentioned to you elsewhere, the whole credits thing and at-time-of-promotion stuff is a complicated way to handle something should be simple, but that stuff has worked that way forever so I'd prefer to leave that can of worms unopened while we get the 2-QPQ principle established.
So would that get you on board? EEng 20:05, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
(if there was a backlog at the time of nomination)seems to do the trick, and I think it's a useful addition to avoid uncertainty: the nominator will then be able to determine at the time they nominate whether they'll be subject to one or two QPQ reviews, and the reviewer should know as well. (Maybe a new box on the nomination and talk pages indicating current backlog QPQ status.) There will probably need to be some kind of display on the DYK talk page that shows both the current requirement and also the dates of past requirements so it's easy for reviewers to check whether it's one or two when working on older nominations. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:54, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
BlueMoonset, I know I'm going to regret this, but some evil impulse compels me... Why don't we just scrap the whole credits thing and do as David suggests in "Version 3" above? It's so much simpler in so many ways, not the least of which is that everything is determined at the time of nomination -- none of this "time of promotion to main page" stuff. You get five free nominations, period, doesn't matter whether it's a self-nom or not. Easy. So, again, why don't we just do that? EEng 04:20, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
That's what I get for making an impulsive post in the middle of the night. Somehow I didn't look carefully at V3. Here's what I meant:
OK, so now what do you think? We've got people's attention focused so it's a unique chance to permanently address the unreviewed backlog, and simplify the freebie system at the same time. Initially I didn't want to open the latter can of worms, but editors at the RfC have got their knickers in a twist and opened Pandora's box, so we may as well bite the bullet and take bull by the horns by running it up the flagpole to see if anyone puts their toe in the water. In for a dime, in for a dollar, I always say.
David, I'm asking you too, of course. EEng 16:48, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I can't seem to get an h-index for Francesco Danieli. If you have a moment, could you appraise his article? Thank you in advance. --- Possibly ☎ 06:40, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Steinitz's theorem you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 14:21, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
An ad hominem argument is not only the sign of a weak argument but is also considered WP:UNCIVIL and contrary to WP:NPA. I perceive that comments made in this edit rise to a level of incivility. Further, the substance of the post could be made without such comments. Please consider this. Cinderella157 (talk) 03:44, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
The article Steinitz's theorem you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Steinitz's theorem for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 06:41, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi David, please revdel this. S0091 (talk)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dyadic rational you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bilorv -- Bilorv (talk) 18:20, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
The article Dyadic rational you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dyadic rational for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bilorv -- Bilorv (talk) 12:41, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
18 August 2021
Please see the talk page entry under the discussion heading
Incorrect statement of conjecture
specifically the addition I made today. After making that addition, I reverted your reversion. Then I made this post.
- Anonymous
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.55.67.20 (talk • contribs) —David Eppstein (talk) 22:40, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello David. Could you cast your experienced NPROF eyes on the article for Gabriela Asturias Ruiz? It strikes me that it may be inflated, seeing as she is only 25. The bio section has her as a lab assistant at 18; some things do not make sense. --- Possibly ☎ 00:54, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
I received notice that there were "multiple failed attempts" to log in to my account "from a new device". Is there any way to learn generally what device and from where? —ATS (talk) 21:54, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
On 22 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gunilla Kreiss, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that mathematician Gunilla Kreiss, the daughter of Heinz-Otto Kreiss, later became his granddaughter? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gunilla Kreiss. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Gunilla Kreiss), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
On 25 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Shirley Chiang, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Shirley Chiang captured the first image of individual benzene molecules? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Shirley Chiang. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Shirley Chiang), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
On 25 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Steinitz's theorem, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that although Steinitz's theorem is commonly used to describe convex polyhedra using graph theory, its original formulation did not use graphs? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Steinitz's theorem. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Steinitz's theorem), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Women in Red | September 2021, Volume 7, Issue 9, Numbers 184, 188, 204, 205, 207, 208
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:29, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
On 28 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dyadic rational, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that dyadic rationals, fractions based on powers of two, can be easier to work with than other kinds of fractions for both schoolchildren and computers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dyadic rational. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Dyadic rational), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Re your edit summary following my revert of your edit to SVD: "The correct answer to DABABBREV is to add the abbreviations to the target articles. WHICH I DID": apologies, I didn't check, and should have (careless, I usually do in cases like this). I still think some of the entries are a bit long - they're meant to disambiguate, not summarise the article - but they qualify for an entry.
Where I'm coming from: I actually use disambiguation pages to find articles. After a few tedious trawls through huge lists of long almost "mini-articles" I've tried to streamline these pages to do their job more efficiently, with as many entries as needed, but no more, and short. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 19:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Re your reversal of adding Shannon to Binary logarithm: I'm not sure I understand your reasoning communicaiotn theory as a notable use of Binary logarithm in the list of application of Binary logarithm? Using base 2 in this analysis greatly facilitates the calculations and is the standard base used in texts and journal articles. Indeed, even the Wiki article uses base 2. Granted, communication theory is often reserved for the graduate level, but cell phones are a (far too) pervasive part of everyday existance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mountainlogic (talk • contribs) 22:10, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
should be for example. This fraction should be better since 1 times n equals n. 176.88.28.90 (talk) 07:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
176.88.28.90 (talk) 14:21, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
I agree. I've been examining their edits, mostly new pages at a rapid clip, for almost an hour. I was about to take action, but you beat me to it.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:25, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello, David,
You deleted this article as being the work of a sockpuppet but a lot of different editors have contributed to it over the past 16 years so I have restored it. Liz Read! Talk! 00:22, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Why would you remove the link on the Redding California page that I re-inserted. The local information provided had been provided on this very page for many years and recently updated. And while you were at it you removed others from local subjects that again were providing information and photos of the beauty that surrounds our area.
I am not a spammer, feel free to contact me! Just a local resident who has spent a great deal of time putting together helpful information for people who are interested in the Redding area. Did you take the time to look at the link?? This is exactly the type of content that I am regularly complimented on and it has been a part of the Wikipedia site for many years for good reason. NO one is being paid and I am not self serving in trying to sell these natural wonders.
If you want to see spam take a look a the "reference" section that includes a link to a gambling site. That is no added content for visitors at all. "City of Redding Flag". Retrieved August 19, 2017. As well as real estate based link with no value to the visitor.
Does your concept of self-serving also include c-span link directly above? It is a private enterprise showing local information, yet it is allowed stay?? How about Bethel Church making their own page to self serve. How far down this rabbit hole is reasonable? Apparently, you and I differ on this. Value added for a visitor is the goal of internet pages worth reading and this is what I have provided on this page and previously many others that are included in the “places of Interest” portion of my website. I’m sorry if you don’t see the helpfulness in this type of content. You are the first in all these years on Wikipedia to do this so I’m a bit flabbergast!!
I saw that you didn't like my edits on the Pigeonhole Principle page. Would you like to work together on an edit that covers uses of the Pigeonhole Principle for dynamic memory allocation? CessnaMan1989 (talk) 17:29, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello,
Some days ago I was reading "Convex polyhedra with regular faces" that I understood that the edges of a quasi-regular polyhedron are shown with the symbol <m,n>. I want to know what is it's name and is there a source I can use to read about it and add it to Wikipedia?
Yours Sincerely, هيربد فودازى٢ (talk) 16:07, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello, David Eppstein. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Elena Prieto, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:01, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello, User:David Eppstein, hope you are well. I am suprised to see established and respected administrator, pushing gossip style content based on tweets citing WP:SPS, despite talk page sentiment, while removing well sourced content. Relevant edits:
I am OK with being skeptical, however such skepticism should be backed up by reputable sources. Also I do not think that edit comments like Are you totally illiterate or just willfully obtuse? help. Infinity Knight (talk) 20:19, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
I saw revision 1045464467 of article Multiply perfect number edited by Shit handler at 18:09, 20 September 2021. Their username is offensive and the user is currently blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please delete the revision of the page stated above because of the vandalism by a new user. Fomfeider (talk) 14:36, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello Professor. I want to know your opinion on this individual in terms of WP:NSCHOLAR. I'm a little confused on this one. If you have time, I would appreciate it if you could have a look. I've seen folks refer to you as an authority on WP:NSCHOLAR, therefore I'm knocking on your door. Please accept my apologies if this causes you any inconvenience. Mosesheron (talk) 20:18, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey! I saw that you removed a deletion discussion I'm doing from a category. I didn't realize it was only for professors as it was called "Academics and Educators" Which made me think the deletion belonged there. Didn't realize it was only for academy professors. My bad. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#0001 20:34, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello again,
The page and it's talk page has been edited again and now there are 58 polyhedra in the list! They reverted some of your edits and didn't give a source for their claim. I wanted to answer them with a list of sources that require not being uniform but remember you saying not to pay attention to them. They even deleted your answer to me!
Your sincerely, Hirbod Foudazi2 (talk) 06:15, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Some people might think that removing merge tags (required for the discussion) is disruptive. Why do you think you are able to do that? Especially since you have replied to the relevant discussion. Selfstudier (talk) 22:41, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Women in Red | October 2021, Volume 7, Issue 10, Numbers 184, 188, 209, 210, 211
Special event:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 01:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
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.