Sorry about this. I thought that the wikilink was the needed citation, which is exactly your point of contention in the discusstion. I reverted my change. Bender2k14 (talk) 20:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The new images are much better, so it's definitely not a problem if you propose for deletion the old ones. Thanks for the message,--Sandrobt (talk) 03:13, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ellipsis
Hi Bender2k14,
I have nothing against the use of high quality svg-files instead of png. In this case
file:Iddots black.svg vs. file:Latex_ellipsis_left-down_to_right-up.png
is used only to compare the genuine LaTeX (sent as png) ellipsis and the reflect-box (that is unfortuantaelly not available in wiki). In this case the png-version looks IMO better (and fine enough). Please compare the both tables:
The SVG version also claims to be the output of \iddots (that is, the inverse of \ddots, which is equalviant to \reflectbox{\ddots}), so it should be possible to make the SVG look at least as good as the PNG. I edited the SVG in the table above by decreasing its size by 2 pixels. Does that look better? Also, I like the alpha coloring in the SVG that is absent in the PNG. I believe that is a big negative of the wiki's math tags, that the background is not completely transparent. Bender2k14 (talk) 14:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Medial Graphs Page
Hi there. Sorry, I did not mean that citations were missing. I meant it would be better if there was a wider range of sources. Looking at the page now I am wondering why I put that there. Feel free to take it off. Thanks. Creeper jack1 (talk) 20:27, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I will remove it. Also, in the future, you should continue the conversation on whoever's talk it starts (in this case, your talk page). Bender2k14 (talk) 21:49, 4 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bender2k14,
I was wondering if you would be willing to make an updated version of the chart [1] that you created several years ago, showing the growth of the largest known Mersenne prime. (If not, I can try to do it myself, but I don't have much experience with Commons.)
Thanks,
JBL (talk) 16:35, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello JBL. Unfortunately, I cannot because I no longer have a subscription to Mathematica. Working with Commons is not bad. I suggest you give it a try! :) Bender2k14 (talk) 17:30, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
but I can't for the life of me figure out how to get it on Commons -- my intent was to upload it as a new version of your image, but I don't see how to do that. If you can figure it out, I would be grateful. --JBL (talk) 21:11, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't remember either. Just figured it out again. Took me a while though. At the bottom of the section titled "File history", click the link that says "Upload a new version of this file". Bender2k14 (talk) 21:23, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see that same message when I am not logged into Commons. Maybe this also describes your situation? If you don't have a Commons account, there is a way to use your Wikipedia account to login to all Wikimedia projects. See Wikipedia:Unified login. Bender2k14 (talk) 02:01, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Jochen. Unfortunately, I cannot because I no longer have a subscription to Mathematica. I knew that creating an image for Wikimedia using proprietary (subscription) software was a trade off, but I still think it was the correct decision since having the original image (or the one modified by by A3nm) is better than no image at all. Bender2k14 (talk) 15:42, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]