|
User talk:Oleg Alexandrov/Archive8HelpmeI am just testing how long it will take for the help to arrive from Wikipedia:Bootcamp. So, dear bootcamper, please leave me a message if you visit over (and sign it, so that I have a date stamp). Let us hope that the service advertised in {{welcome}} actually works. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:29, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
Your edits at derivativeHi. I left a message at talk:derivative. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 01:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
I think the full rigorous definition is still compatible with newbies to the subject. Must they read from top to bottom? I don't know about anyone else, but when I go here, I search for what I want on the page - never reading most of the article (unless i'm interested of course). Also, I skip parts that I don't understand and see if later parts will clarify. For example, when an equation is put up, its customary to put the definitions of the variables underneath not above (usually). On the derivative page, the first thing after the definition is simple simple explanation of the derivative. Some simplicity could be added to the top too. But it seems counter intuitive to have the consolidated main definition to be obscured by explanations and introductions. Fresheneesz 04:41, 11 February 2006 (UTC) Find the edit summary usage of an editor at the English Wikipedia.Is there any way to do this on other language wikipedias to? /Grön 09:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
I saw your request at m:Toolserver, so I have just tested it for nl.wikipedia, but I have stopped it after many pages of only: Fetching http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=JePe&offset=0&limit=500 ... Done! sleeping for 5 seconds to give the server a break... Fetching http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=JePe&offset=0&limit=500 ... Done! sleeping for 5 seconds to give the server a break... Fetching http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=JePe&offset=0&limit=500 ... Done! sleeping for 5 seconds to give the server a break... Maybe there is something going wrong because it was continualy fetching the first contributions page without going to the next page. JePe 08:09, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
What's up with this?Hi Oleg. Who is this guy and why is he updating PlanetMath Exchange stats? Paul August ☎
Ok. But this last edit seems odd, with the totals declining. Paul August ☎ 01:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Cleanup noteHi. Thank you for doing clean up in articles. However, I would like to note that doing an edit for the sake of putting categories on separate lines, like here is, I believe, not that urgent. It also obscures one's watchlist, which causes more work when tracking articles. I would suggest that the AWB framework be used only for more substantial edits, and that the edit summary used be more relevant, indicating the specific task done in the given article. Wonder what you think, you can reply here. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 19:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I tried to say that it is not worth the trouble modifying articles for edits like inserting a newline between categories, which has no effect on the page layout. That is to say, if you do decide to use AWB on a given article, I think it should be if you saw a typo, or wanted to fix a missspelling; meaning something which will make a difference in how the article looks like, and then it is fine if it fixes other things along the way. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 21:11, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Typesetting Orientability articleThanks for your input on this article, Oleg. To be honest, I had intended returning to the article today to tidy up the typesetting. With the change to a plain bold "R" for reals, I thought it was a good idea to change the reflection function to "r" for clarity. A previous editor had introduced the special font , which was what I was brought up on, but I am happy with the simpler R3. Much more importantly, it occurred to me that the "letter R" definition of orientability was fundamentally flawed, as although this would be valid in Courier, it is not valid in Arial, as in this font, "R" may be topologically deformed in the plane to its mirror image. A careful look identified the symbol "đ" which is fancy enough to not be deformable into its mirror image. Elroch 11:11, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
I replaced the letters in the article, then suddenly realised that n fact neither "đ" nor R (courier) are strictly suitable for the purpose. Both are topological a circle with some things attached at different points, but topology allows one to change either into its mirror image in the plane (to be suitable, a circle would have to have 3 different things attached). After a bit of browbeating I came up with the idea of using Your voteLike last time, I as surprised by both your vote and the reasons you provided. I would be interested in an explanation, which of course you are in no obligation to provide and feel free not to respond. If you remember, the whole previous RfA was a sham and failed purely because of trolls and sockpuppets. Take a look if you don't remember the details. Like the last time, even though I request some details from you about your vote, I will not contact you again with any more pressure following this message. I just want to try to understand the reasons and prompt you to giving it a second thought. Sorry for bothering you and thank you in advance, --Irpen 01:10, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your answer. As for your condescending advise, thank you too. Sorry to have bothered you but I promise this was the last time. --Irpen 02:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Please do not edit my comments at RfA even if by just changing their color. I am a reasonable and well established here editor with some reputation, sufficient to expect my comments at RfA not edited, changed or moved, like those of a sock. As for your previous message here, please take my non-responding to your rather impolite advise as a response. You don't have to respond to this request in any way either. Thank you. --Irpen 17:11, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Of course the article is not helpful! it's a stub. It needs expanding, not redirecting. If you have some knowledge in this field, please expand the article. Redirecting to "value" just takes you back to the disambiguation page. -- Dullfig 03:54, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
Oleg: functions are not the only thing with value in mathematics. Variables have a value also. Numbers also (numbers are a representation of a quantity, a value). So I still think the original article just needed expanding. --unsigned by Dullfig
I wrote, "Function (mathematics)|Functions]] map a set of values to aother set of values. A variable such as x, y, or z has a value. A value is not a quantity." Timothy Clemans Award It's not fair. I do all the work and that bag of water gets the barnstar. I am going on strike and I will not update the lists at Talk:List of numerical analysis topics before Oleg gives me some more attention. Puh! -- Mathbot (Translation: If I go to http://www.math.ucla.edu/~aoleg/wp/lists/lists.pl.cgi?Talk:List_of_numerical_analysis_topics , I get "Error! No articles in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Numerical_analysis !!!" and similar errors for the other categories. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 20:14, 18 February 2006 (UTC))
Thanks for the award. My bot had me put it on his page, says it is he who does the work (per Jitse, above). :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC) Bot hacking
Will do, hopefully tomorrow. That may suggest articles which are in the list and which shouldn't. Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:25, 18 February 2006 (UTC) List of solution strategies for differential equationsHi again Oleg, we keep finding ourselves on the same articles. If I still lived in LA, I'd say we should meet up in person. :-) Regarding List of solution strategies for differential equations, I wrote it with the intention of having a place to go to answer the question "how do I solve this DE?". As such, I like the idea of having the short version of the method along with the list. Examples of differential equations didn't seem as focused to me as the list I am trying to compile. Depending on the real goal for the examples page, it may or may not want to get merged with my list, but right now I think they are serving different purposes. ―BenFrantzDale 03:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Mathbot and RfAI've made a comment about Mathbot's leaving statistics on RfA's at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship#Mathbot. As I believe this concerns or would be of interest to you, I'm inviting you to participate in discussion. Thanks. Rob Church (talk) 18:59, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Comparing lists and categoriesI'd love to be able to compare the contents of the list of "Good Articles" at WP:GA with the contents of Category:Wikipedia good articles, so that the list can be kept up to date. I've heard that you possess some magical way of comparing lists and categories (well, technological I suppose, but in truth there is little difference for ordinary mortals like me!). Would you be able to give me any advice on how I could go about it? Many thanks, TheGrappler 23:24, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Those are on their own subpage again, Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Good articles. I could of course deal with it, but I'd rather ask you guys to move to Wikipedia:Good articles/Trains or similar, first. I think it is a good idea that subpages are all under Wikipedia:Good articles rather than all over the place. :) Wonder what you think. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
mathbot requestI've recently been doing some editing on Category talk:Featured desktop backgrounds and realized that a bot would do a much better job of adding images to this page. The page explains what it's looking for but for brief summary, all featured pictures that are above a certain size should be added to this category. This is currently done manually which is very inefficient and incomplete. I would think a bot could do this relatively easily. Let me know what you think. Vicarious 04:42, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Your comment about mathbotHi. Thanks for your input at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#Mathbot. Just a quick remark: the edit summary usage my bot gives does not count the talk pages, Wikipedia and user namespaces. It also counts separately major and minor edits, as the former should indeed be summarized more often than the latter. Just thought I would let you know. :) By the way, I noticed my bot bugged you a few days ago about using edit summaries yourself, might be a good habit, you know. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:24, 20 February 2006 (UTC) (PS You can reply here if you have comments, I will keep your talk page on my watchlist. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:24, 20 February 2006 (UTC))
Enhancement requestHere's an enhancement request, as a result of this thread: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship#Mathbot... can you get it to count more stuff and report it in subtotals? Thanks for considering it. I watch threads I start, so you can reply here. ++Lar: t/c 20:08, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
hip hop listsCompleted most of the manual categorization on the stuff remaining. However, please check out the talk page for something I would like your bot to do so that I can complete the manual categorization. Thanks!--Urthogie 16:29, 20 February 2006 (UTC) wp:dfa digressionNot wanting to derail discussion elsewhere...
For all symbolsThanks for the edit over on Ideal (ring theory). You're right about the symbols, and I appreciate the criticism! Keep up the good work! I'm trying to make some of these pages more legible and organized... some of the math pages are a bit daunting, even for those of us who already know what the page says. - grubber 04:33, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
My user pageSeems that I can't keep my own user page in good shape - [1]:-) Pathetic :-D Thanks AdamSmithee 07:58, 22 February 2006 (UTC) John Baez conflict of interestAs your are a mathematically inclined admin, you may know that John Baez, the famous mathematical physicist has an account at User:John Baez. He has been adding some of his material -lecture notes, publications, etc, in the references sections of some maths articles. Does this present any conflict of interest problems wrt spamming?? Regards, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 00:00, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Template:RollbackI have userfied this template per your request on Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 February 15 to User:Oleg Alexandrov/Template:Rollback. Apologies if you have already done this; you can just delete this version. -Splashtalk 01:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
gonna make this easier for youHow about I go through those categories manually, so you can just do the regular list maintenance?--Urthogie 17:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
re: cauchy sequencesIn reply to your post to my page regarding my Cauchy sequence edit, first, thank you for the post and letting me know about the "edit comments" things. However, regarding the subject, I still feel it correct. The definition of a Cauchy sequence involving the absolute values doesn't just apply to real numbers; it also applies to rational numbers and integers. It implies to any Cauchy set. It is also the definition given in any introductory Real Analysis textbook. While it certainly may not belong under any "metrix spaces" section, I still feel that it is the fundamental definition of a Cauchy sequence, and one that people are likely to look for. It merely puts the statement I edited into some more mathematical and intuitive language. Still, I won't edit it back without discussing it with you first, first and foremost since I'm so new to this whole "wikipedia" thing. Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hodge Star (talk • contribs) .
Thanks for your voting! Hi, thanks for your voting on my RFA. It has finished with the result 88/14/9, and I am promoted. I am really overwhelmed with the amount of support I have got. With some of you we have edited many articles as a team, with some I had bitter arguments in the past, some of you I consider to be living legends of Wikipedia and some nicks I in my ignorance never heard before. I love you all and I am really grateful to you. If you feel I can help you or Wikipedia as a human, as an editor or with my newly acquired cleaning tools, then just ask and I will be happy to assist. If you will feel that I do not live up to your expectation and renegade on my promises, please contact me. Maybe it was not a malice but just ignorance or a short temper. Thank you very much, once more! abakharev 07:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC) I have just done a massive refactoring of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tony Sidaway/Workshop, in order to
As your words appear on that page, I'm letting you know so that you may review the changes. I have tried not to let any bias or POV I may have color my summaries; however, it's a wiki, so if you think I've misrepresented your words, please fix them. Wearily yours, Mindspillage (spill yours?) 08:16, 24 February 2006 (UTC) Mathbot minor detailOleg, I've just a minor suggested tweak to the text your Mathbot uses to deliver its "please use edit summaries" message (example here). The users that chronically underuse edit summaries are probably unaware of Wikipedia policy and might not know what a bot IS - you might want to link bot in the opening line to something that explains what a bot is. Just an idea, -- stillnotelf has a talk page 21:59, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
I just ran across a user who had been advised about edit summaries by your bot. Cute! This is a useful thing. William M. Connolley 22:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
remaining steps in hip hop listsI went through and manually categorized. I plotted out the remaining steps before we're done atTalk:List_of_hip_hop_musicians#split.28continued_further.29. Peace, --Urthogie 15:30, 25 February 2006 (UTC) UM HILinas is a known vandaliser. i am doing my wikiduty. --IRevLinas 01:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Mathbot edit summaryJust a small typo: Mathbot spells "Wallpaper" as "Walpaper". And a question: Is there also a widescreen desktop background category? Kusma (討論) 04:45, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
ElgorithmsI noticed that your spelling bot changed "Elgorithms" to "Algorithms" on the MD5 page. Elgorithms is a name of the company who produces an MD5 generator for the Windows operating system, and should not be changed to algorithms. If you could add this exception to your spelling bot, I would apreciate it! -- 68.167.72.243 18:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
IntensionsI'm afraid the use of intensions in Relation (mathematics) was intentional, although I may not agree with it. I changed it back, but I don't know what the chances of mathbot seeing it again. -- Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:54, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
edit summariesIs there a way that I can view my own edit summary % through mathbot? Or do I have to file a RfA for that? I'm curious to know what my % of edit summary usage is.⇒ SWATJester
What means percentages of major and minor edits? I think that major + minor = 100 % Is that right? I tried it with finnish Wikipedia and got 64% + 99% = 163%. I know, that it is only test version. Thank you anyway. --Ilkant 15:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
printing to browserHi there... this is maybe a awkward question since it has nothing to do with Wikipedia, but I recently started writting bots and I really liked the way mathbot writes out information while processing edit summaries... so could you tell me how do you do that? How do you get the browser to display info before the script is actually done executing? --Dijxtra 09:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
while (looking at of your contributions){
print "getting the next url...\n";
get($url);
print "Done\n";
parse_data($url);
}
My talk pageYour bot just blanked my talk page. Kingjeff 16:06, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
Who knewHey Oleg have you seen this. Number seven! Paul August ☎ 23:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
I really think it's notable to refer to Yokogawa's proof there. I don't know anyone else who explicitly stated that way and proved it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WAREL (talk • contribs) .
Who else had actually proved it?WAREL 03:32, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't know, but someone must did it. The recognition that "every real number except has....." is relatively new when you think of the History of Math.WAREL 03:40, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Before Cantor,no one exactly knew what real number was. It's at least after Cantor that someone obtained that theorem.I don't know exactly who it was that first obtained the theorem after Cantor. But I know Yokogawa has proved it. It's just that it's written in Japanese. WAREL 04:10, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm saying I know Yokogawa proved,then why wrong to write about it?WAREL 04:24, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Give me one person beside yourself that proved that fact.If you know no one,then surely Yokogawa should be there. Because the theorem must have not come from itself. WAREL 05:08, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes,he's really close to there but he hasn't explicitly stated it and proved. WAREL 01:36, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Well,first of all, it's really the statement that is what important. I will think about translating it sometime if you let Yokogawa's name in that article.WAREL 02:08, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
What does Mathbot consider as an edit summary?Hi, I have a small question about what Mathbot considers an edit summary. Does it consider the default /* Section title */ edit summary, supplied when a user edits a section, as an edit summary, even if the user does not type anything else into the "Edit summary" box? Thanks. — Kimchi.sg | Talk 07:55, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Cheers dudeI always forget that box, and I hate it when others leave it blank! Thanks for the reminder :) --Dan|(talk) 14:12, 4 March 2006 (UTC) Edit summary toolHi, I think your tool may get a decent speedup if you simply add &namespace=0 to the url you are fetching, this will limit the scope to article namespace and works on all wikies (it seems so)–Gnomz007(?) 21:25, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank youThis edit summary made my day. :) -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 01:54, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
done with list of hip hop musiciansCheck it out, its now a disambiguation page to the other lists. Once the remaining steps are done, it'd be cool if you could attach the listbot to the lists that are associated with categories. After each list is attached to that, I suppose its time to nominate this at Wikipedia:Featured lists!--Urthogie 16:56, 5 March 2006 (UTC) {{LaTeX}}Quick question: should a page use a combination of LaTeX and HTML formatting, or should its use be consistent throughout an entire article? I have tagged sections with {{LaTeX}} when the section in question deviated from the precendent set by the rest of the article. Thank you for your continued patience and assistance. Isopropyl 23:45, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
In "Proof that the sum of the reciprocals of the primes diverges" articleI did write the fourth theorem.However, I'm not really sure if
with the last equality being true by the comparison test, comparing with the harmonic series.
WOW! that's probably the most confusing formula I have ever seen. --69.232.218.27 04:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Clearly Oleg was showing off by only using elementary manipulations. :-) For anyone whose eyes are glazed over, I think this does the trick: Elroch 18:48, 6 March 2006 (UTC) Links to unit convertor
Why you've removed the link to http://www.unitconversion.org/unit_converter/area-ex.html from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area for example Dont you see that it is a perfect fit? I mean it is a 100% hit not even 99% It is like a link to length converter from the 'Length' page. Did you wrote this articles? looks like you are completely out of the topic of units and unit conversion Roland Barrat
logarithmHi. I am writing with a small request. I would like to ask you to use edit summaries explaining your changes a bit more often when you contribute. To be honest, when I saw this change, I thought it was trolling, and I almost reverted it. Some things which are obvious to you are not obvious to others, and a brief description of your change in the edit summary box can prevent confusion. :) You can reply here if you have comments. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Oleg. I believe you are the right person to approach about this since I've observed your tact and skill at informing people of violations in policy and what good editing is. The article on Paul Sally is something of a mess. There is for example unsourced anecdotal info in the article. That might not be so bad, but there was a huge quotes section which was clearly not verifiable. I decided to be polite and tag them with citation needed tags, but another editor removed them even though I've notified him/her of WP:Verifiability. Anyway, the problem as I see it, is a number of editors have insisted on adding and modifying this unverifiable info, so I believe I may be outnumbered. Anyway, I've decided to be bold at last, and remove the quotes section. I would appreciate if you could keep an eye on that page. --C S (Talk) 16:35, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
HeySorry about that correction on Multiple Integrals, I jumped the gun on the edit and forgot to comment my change, but thanks for the heads up. Med- 18:24, 7 March 2006 (UTC) ReferencesI've been told that Wikipedia articles should avoid bullet points (as unencyclopedic) and should contain references. I've been surprised how many of the mathematics articles do have bullet points and do not have references. Is this something that needs working on, do you think? Rick Norwood 23:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, Lethe, you are:
I think I am bad too, I can't live without bullet points either. Who said they are wrong? Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:20, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Hello, An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Guanaco, MarkSweep, et al. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Guanaco, MarkSweep, et al/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Guanaco, MarkSweep, et al/Workshop. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Johnleemk | Talk 16:54, 8 March 2006 (UTC) GlitchHad a keypad glitch. That should explain it all. Martial Law 23:15, 8 March 2006 (UTC) :)
My keypd fouled up when I accepted the Rfa. Martial Law 02:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC) :) Re: Edit DescriptionsThanks for the reminder on entering edit lines. I usuall do, but I think the comment was in reference to my edit on the Dirac delta function page. I was just fixing a LaTeX formating mistake I noticed, and did it so fast I fogrot to check minor edit or write anything. Sorry. Alex 04:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC) My DFAThanks for the comments on my DFA. However I think it had went pretty stale before you commented and Aaron ended up taking it off the page and putting someone else's in, instead, shortly after you did. So yours may be the only comment it actually gets. I'm not averse to being a guinea pig again if it would be helpful though. ++Lar: t/c 06:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC) Hi, I revised the page and put the result on the discussion page, but I am not satisfied. I think I should wait some days for better ideas. Hottiger 20:11, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
The prime number pagePlease review my changes to the prime number page and correct any problems. Please respond back to me here. Timothy Clemans 21:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
You are watching my talk page because you are curious about things which are not of your business. :) At least, that's one of the greatest joys I get from Wikipedia myself, never missing to interject about something on somebody else's talk page when I have a chance. :) I will look at the prime number page myself also later today. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:50, 9 March 2006 (UTC) I think the improvements fostered more improvements and that is a good thing. I thinking about getting it the quality of Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 13, 2006, Game Theory Timothy Clemans 00:14, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
What do you think of the prime number page now after major edits and minor fixes, by many people including you and me? Timothy Clemans 22:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
GMRESHi Jitse. Thanks a lot for the new GMRES article! Yes, it was exactly you I had in mind when I put the request at the Wikipedia:Requested articles/Mathematics, but I did not think that it will work out so soon. Awesome! Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 15:50, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
AnswerI shot out an answer to your question. Let me know if you need anything else. Thanks for asking it and I hope to have your support.Gator (talk) 03:43, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
get Wikipedia to use Math software toolshi Oleg, can you get math wikipedians to start to the Compass'n'Ruler program? it's a java program, GPL licensed. Very nice, in fact best in its class. It'll be a tremendous contribution if people started to use that as aids in articles. This would be in a similar vein as wiki starting to use some opensource multimedia types. Xah Lee 05:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
http://xahlee.org/SpecialPlaneCurves_dir/BezierCurve_dir/bezierCurve.html http://xahlee.org/SpecialPlaneCurves_dir/CrossCurve_dir/crossCurve.html http://xahlee.org/SpecialPlaneCurves_dir/Piriform_dir/piriform.html Xah Lee 12:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC) Thanks. I don't care that much if a tool is open source or not. It matters more I think if the images produced by the tool are GFDL/public domain. I will consider looking at that program, however, when I decide to make some pictures, although heaven knows when that may happen. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 17:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
Will try. :) You could experiment yourself, say by contributing to an article. :) Thanks. You are not pressing me at all, I was not aware of such a program and its capabilities in generating java applets. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:43, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
UninterestedI'm not interested in your advice. Find an alternative and see if you can make it work. Don't criticize me for doing the best I can. Everyking 04:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC) See my commentson my talk page. --Haham hanuka 11:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC) Scientific peer reviewYou might be interested in WP:SPR, if you don't already know about it. Karol 19:29, 11 March 2006 (UTC) I am moving this section to the Helmholtz equation discussion page. Help on fourier seriesHey, I think the edits on fourier series are going in the right direction, but I find it very difficult to follow. And I don't have the experience to know whats good and whats not on this scale (where everything seems to be changing on the page). I would appreciate it if the page got your attention for a little bit. Fresheneesz 23:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
List of mathematics articlesOn all the subpages of your bot-updated List of mathematics articles, you try to provide links to talk pages using the following syntax:
Note that some browsers won't provide a link on a space character. Here on IE 6.0, for example, I don't have any way to follow such links; not only are they not visible, they're simply not there. I would recommend something similar to
or
instead. - dcljr (talk) 19:59, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I guess I will keep things the way they are, unless there is a good reason to change. That page is not much visited anway, as it is too huge and undifferentiated to serve any useful browsing purpose. Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 21:16, 13 March 2006 (UTC) LaTeX rendered as HTMLI would like to propose a change to the monobook.css file, and I can't seem to get the attention of any of the other admins, despite raising this at the village pump. Including the line
will cause LaTeX code rendered as HTML to be the same size as code that was written in HTML in the first place. It will make mathematics articles easier to read. What do you think? --mets501 22:34, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
Done. I think it is good if you keep MediaWiki:Common.css on your watchlist, to see if anybody objects. Yes, now the LaTeX-generated html looks the same size and font as true HTML, so I can't tell the difference between
which were generated with the codes <math>x</math> and ''x'' Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 19:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
In my browser, ω (omega) looks ugly, but when I set it to italic, ω, it looks better. π looks rather good to me, and it is exactly the same in italic, π. So I don't know what to say. Try inserting the above span.texhtml { font-family: sans-serif; }
in your User:MFH/monobook.css, do a hard reload (CTRL-SHFIT-R in Mozilla) and see if it is any better. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:04, 18 March 2006 (UTC) good articleI would think that the article on mathematics might be worthy of nomination as a good article. What do you think? Rick Norwood
MathbotHey Oleg. This diff - [4]. That crazy Mathbot overwrote my comment! Grr, stupid bot! :@ Just kidding, I don't mind, but you probably ought to look into it. Proto||type 16:14, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
mathbot manual query feedbackOleg, just to let you know, your tool for Mathbot at http://www.math.ucla.edu/~aoleg/wp/rfa/edit_summary.html is has some misspellings: "Curtsey of mathbot. Feeback?" should read "Courtesy of Mathbot. Feedback?" Not to be picky...I reached for the edit tab to fix it myself, but alas, it's not there :) GREAT job with the tool, BTW, now I can finally check to see if I'm keeping my summaries up like I should. Thanks! -- stillnotelf has a talk page 03:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
one thing still remainingI almost forgot. Will you be able to sort, ignoring 'The' at the beginning? Thanks, --Urthogie 18:19, 18 March 2006 (UTC) My RFA re: jensen's inequality -- no worries. whoever wrote the previous post had removed math formatting from the line. guess the period got lost in reformatting. --128.12.17.31 Requested page moveMay I draw your attention to the requested move
on Wikipedia:Requested_moves#March_20.2C_2006? It may take a mathematician to see this is a justified move. LambiamTalk 22:01, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Request for edit summaryHow about no? I always use edit summaries on articles, but there's no reason to use them on talk pages, as everything is signed. --SPUI (talk - don't use sorted stub templates!) 05:19, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Mathbot on RfAsHello again, Oleg. I'm just dropping by to thank you for manually adding mathbot's edit summary assessment to my RfA. I've no idea why it didn't do it automatically, although I notice that this happens on occassion. If there is anything Tito or I did incorrectly in setting up the nomination that might explain this, please let me know. Kind regards —Encephalon 18:22, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Infinite decimal representationsGreetings. You reverted the reversion of the removal of this section stating it was covered above. I don't think the fact was covered that every real number except 0 has an infinite rexpansentration, nor that it is unique. I agree that these are somewhat trivial statements that are obvious to mathematicians (except intuitionists, who would disagree) and easy consequences of the stuff above if you read all sections , but most readers are not mathematicians and what is easy to some of us may be an unsurmountable hurdle to them. LambiamTalk 15:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
List of alternative hip hop musicians/RedlinksThis has shown up on User:Bluemoose/Uncategorised good articles and it looks to me that it shouldn't be categorized. So, is this the best place for this list? I thought I read somewhere that subpages in the main article space were discouraged. Would it be better to move it under your User page? --JeffW 20:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Any suggested things to be done?I have been working in my area of interest and expertise which is the Category "Ordinal numbers" and related matters. I am running out of things to do. Do you know of any problems in that area that need to be corrected? Or any topics for which articles should be added? JRSpriggs 04:26, 25 March 2006 (UTC) Heh, I would like to hear that kind of questions more often. :) Try talking to Trovatore who is our expert in that area. Also see
PS: Do you have Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics on your watchlist? That's a good way to figure out what wiki-mathematicians are up to. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 04:45, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that the article on König's theorem does not have a proof of the theorem in it. Since I am familiar with the proof, I could add one. Is that considered necessary for an article on a theorem to be considered finished? Should I do it? The down-side is that it might triple the length of the article. JRSpriggs 06:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Style tip"The external links go at the bottom of the article". I am relativelly new to the Wikipedia... and did not realize that. Thanks. Cheers.Tó campos 15:29, 25 March 2006 (UTC) That's only if they are simply external links and not quoted sources. If they are sources, you will often find them in the body of the article with simply a numbered link. WaterGuy 17:08, 25 April 2006 (UTC) Re: edit summariesthanks for the reminder ;-) juppiter bon giorno #c 06:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC) Adjacent vertexI don't know how I missed the cat on creating that but good catch. :) Cburnett 16:23, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Warel and perfect numbersI'm afraid WAREL (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is again edit warring at perfect number, about the same thing as before (decidability). Diffs: 1, 2, 3, 4. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 11:27, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Oleg, you deserve some sort of award for your ability to show patience with a WAREL. After reading through the talk page, I believe that many others would have lost their cool by this point. Isopropyl 17:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Mathbot/page3Excuse me, but is mathbot your wikibot? --OrbitOne [Talk|Babel] 21:36, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Okay then, thanks for letting me know.--OrbitOne [Talk|Babel] 21:43, 29 March 2006 (UTC) Edit summary on talk pages?!But why? I mean, i've been pretty good about adding a summary to all the regular edits I do (tho some of them have been a little vague). But why on talk pages, who looks at talk page histories? I only look to see if someone deleted somthing from them.... ? Fresheneesz 23:14, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Checking if this puts it in the edit summaryAlright then, I'll try to put in an edit summary on particularly important posts, or ones I want you to read then. My laziness might work against me on this one. Fresheneesz 23:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
User:Jose and Ricardo and date conventionsI've noticed you've already killed some of his (their?) date redirects, and I was wondering your opinion on some of the others. See my /deletion candidates subpage for a list of some of other ones. (The ones marked CSD are the ones I already nominated under CSD R1 or R3.) I can't find a good indication in either Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) or Wikipedia:Naming conventions (numbers and dates) as to when a redirect is inappropriate -- nor do I have a good tool for quickly nominating a series of redirects for deletion, or I'd probably do that and let normal procedures operate. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 15:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
Ring of setsHello Oleg Can you please put a category to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_of_sets Chao, Diego Torquemada 09:08, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Apollonius' theorem
Thank you for pointing out the blatant error in my article and attempting to correct it. m and n cannot be any two numbers; the theorem seems terribly wrong then. I must have been half-asleep when I wrote it :) However, by attempting to correct it, there is a loss of generalisation; you have considered a special case of the Apollonius' theorem where . My version of the Apollonius theorem can be corrected by adding the line "D divides BC in the ratio m:n". m and n are obviously not any two numbers, but two positive real numbers that correspond to the ratio BC is divided by D. I'm not sure if the theorem holds when D is a point on BC extended. I shall hence attempt to prove it and post the result shortly. I don't like the diagram you took from mathworld very much, and I shall also attempt to draw a clearer diagram with Inkscape* to replace it. (*) I'm not very good with Inkscape, and I'm just wondering which vector drawing applications you use. --ram_einstein 05:25, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
edit reasonsAre you talking about something specific? I can't say I'm very concerned about my edits being mistaken for vandalism, seeing as how I don't vandalize, and I doubt there's a much of a segment of the wikipedia population which goes around reverting edits with no summaries. How does one report a bug in the Wiki software?I think that I may have found a bug in the Wiki software which affects the visibility of the most recent entry in the History. How do I report it? JRSpriggs 09:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC) preview buttonThanks for pointing out the preview button, Oleg. Sorry about the saves. —This unsigned comment was added by 24.155.72.152 (talk • contribs) 17:20, April 2, 2006. (now Mct mht (talk · contribs)) Thank youThank you for your vote of confidence in my recent request for bureaucratship. Even though it didn't pass, I greatly appreciate your support and hope I will continue to have your respect. Thank you! Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:59, 2 April 2006 (UTC) Further harassment from Anittas.Hey Oleg, Anittas has started up his homophobic activity again. See the last section of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Moldovan_language . --unsigned, presumably by User:Node ue contributing anonymously.
Request to delete typo articlesI'm not sure I can take the liberty to ask you to do this for me, but here goes. I don't have the necessary previliges to do so; could you please remove the following articles? They are currently redirects to the correct articles (the titles are typo spelling-mistakes): The spellings seem outrageous and there's no point having those redirects. I ought to be more careful with my typo errors especially when I'm creating new articles. I hope someone doesn't mistake me for a spambot or any of this as vandalism; I created so many atricles in such a short time span. Sorry for the inconvinience and thank you. --ram_einstein 17:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Simpson's RuleYou are right, the code you put in was for the composite rule, so it was a different code. An edit summary may be useful when adding things to clarify what you do. :) Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Covariance and contravarianceHi Oleg, you are the person I run into most on math pages. I've been trying to understand Covariance and contravariance and can't make heads or tails of it. From the talk page, neither can anyone else. If you have anything to add to that, it would be appreciated. Thanks. —Ben FrantzDale 05:30, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
AnittasHi Oleg. I noticed that you've blocked Anittas for twelve hours for the two statements he made on the Moldovan language talk page. I understand that personal attacks, particularly one against sexual orientation, should not be tolerated on Wikipedia, and that Anittas has a personal history of anti-LGBT statements. But, the two statements he made to Node really make no direct mention at all of gay people or sexual orientation. I think reading it as a homophobic statement is personal opinion and hence does not justify a ban under policy. But even if the "y'all know what I'm saying" is interpreted as a veiled attack against Node, I don't really see how this amounts to harrassment. I think it's important to judge all cases at face value and not judge others on their past behaviours. Thanks,
LogarithmHi, I noticed that you removed the <references/> tag I placed on the logarithm page. In an earlier edit, I footnoted part of that article, and the <references/> tag allows the footnote to show up. If I've done this incorrectly, or if there's a new standard for footnoting (different than Wikipedia:Footnotes), please let me know. Thanks, Docether 15:09, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
preferencesThe editing tab in my preferences now has an option to prompt when entering a blank edit summary. You might want to point this out in Mathbot's message. G Clark 22:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
While cleaning out the WP:TFD backlog I closed the discussion on this template, which had resulted in a solid majority of reasoned opinions in favor of deletion. During the debate you offered bot assistance to remove it from category pages. Are you still up for that? I've placed this template in the holding cell for now. Thanks, --MarkSweep (call me collect) 00:40, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
WAREL/DYLANOleg, even though I don't fully support your permanent ban action on WAREL/DYLAN, I want to say that I think you've done a fabulous job over the last few weeks in handling a very difficult customer. I have derived much strength from your patience :-) Dmharvey 18:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Kusma's RfA Hello, Oleg Alexandrov! Thank you for your support in my recent successful request for adminship. And thank you for welcoming me to Wikipedia a long time ago. I hope I can get more active in math related articles, but then again, I do maths all day anyway, and there's so much else to do. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 02:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC) I can be clearIt's to my shame and my detriment that I'm not. As a matter of fact, a little bit of effort out of myself on this count, and I could revise many of the definitions here to be more precise. Mathematics isn't my strength...I wasn't born with it. Now language, it's starting to seem, is another story. :) --VKokielov 06:22, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Please block them nowCan you do an IP-based block that will block all the socks at once? --Trovatore 21:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Edit summariesOleg, when you have free time, can you please run the mathbot for some recent succesful admins picked at random to see what their usage of edit summaries are (a) just before RfA (b) in the few weeks prior to that and (c) after becoming admin. Just to see whether people change their habits just for the sake of the RfA and revert to their older selves once the thing is done. Tintin (talk) 11:06, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Happy anniversaryHappy anniversary to Mathbot. Seems like only yesterday we were watching him removing extra blank lines from math articles and now he's an integral part of the wikipedia policy machine. -lethe talk + 17:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Possible Error by MathbotI first noticed this possible error on Siva1979's RFA. Clicking [5] reports an error even though the contribs link works fine. — Kimchi.sg | Talk 02:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Wow, that was fast! The link's working now. Thanks. — Kimchi.sg | Talk 03:02, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Edit summariesThanks for the notice. I'll try to make it a habit to add summaries from now on. :) thunderboltz(TALK) 04:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC) HelloThanks for noticing that I forgot to put on a summary.. But I can only see that I did that with an article I created. Is it normal to do that with those as well? --Steffen Grønneberg 15:59, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
--Steffen Grønneberg 16:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC) Equation template/style tipI responded on my page - the gist: I make some mistakes, sometimes. I know the general conventions now. Thanks. Fresheneesz 19:21, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Failed to parse (syntax error): {\displaystyle '"`UNIQ--math-0000001C-QINU`"'} ((7))
the dual space of L^\infty(X, \sigma) is the space of signed measuresIs that so? You consider L^\infty with the sup norm? (i.e. no identifications). Where can I find a proof? --anon
I am sorry to bother you again with this, but I think there can be a little mistake here. To identify functions that differ almost everwhere we need a measure. We cannot do an indentification that will work for every possible measure to be represented as functionals. Even in cases where there is no need for identification I think the result fails. For example consider X = the natural numbers, \Sigma = all subsets of X and \varphi a continuos linear function over L^\infty(X) called a Banach limit. This is an extention of the "limit" functional that sends a convergent sequence to its limit. It can be obtained using the Hahn-Banach theorem, but if you construct it carefully enough you can make it transtaltion invariant and positive over all l^\infty. In any case, I think this funcitonal cannot be reprensented by a measure over N. Suposse there is a measure \mu such that \varphi = \int_X * d\mu, where the asterix is the variable. Computing \varphi in the canonical basis we see that \mu({k})=0, for all natural numbers k (because \mu({k}) = \int_X e_k d\mu = \varphi(e_k) = lim(e_k) = 0, where e_k is the sequence that takes the value 1 in k and 0 everywhere else). Then \mu( {k} ) = 0, for all natural numbers k. So for a subset A \subseteq X we have that \mu(A) \leq \sum_{k \in A} \mu({k}) = 0. So \mu is identically 0 and so \varphi should be, but it is not since there are sequences with nonzero limit. Please check my calculations because I can have missed something. The theorem I recall is that the dual space of the space continuos functions on a compact and Hausdorff topological space is isomorfic to the space of signed (or complex valued, depending on the field) measures that are Borel regular, finite, etc., through the map you defined in your article. There we do not have any identification problems. The theorem can be extended to locally compact spaces through one point compactification, but I've never heard of anything that will cover the case L^\infty of an arbitrary space (that's why your article called my attention so much) In the example above we can consider convergent sequences as continuos functions from the one point (Alexandroff) compactification of X and then the limit functional is represented by a measure on it: it is the delta of the infinity point. Since this measure is not supported in X = the natural numbers, neither it is its extention to all l^\infty. When X = the natural numbers, we can consider L^\infty(X) and need no identifications. There there is a trick that will compute its dual. If we take X=the natural numbers, with the discrete topology and then consider N* its Stone-Cech compactification every bounded map from X to R can be extended in a unique way to a continuos function over N*. Then we can indentify L^\infty(X) and C(N*) through this extention operator. Using the Riesz representation thoeorem I mentioned C(N*) is isomorfic (in the canonical way) with the space of borel regular, finite, bla, bla measures over N*, the Stone-Cech compactificacion of N. Anyway, I will go into some books to see if I find a better explanations of the relationship of measures and the dual of L^\infty. I changed a spelling mistake I have made in the title of my question. Thanks for writing articles on math! --anon
Parameters for the edit summary toolHi! I like the new user interface of your edit summary tool, especially the project name option, which wasn't there the last time we spoke. The cgi takes the user name as a URL parameter, e.g. http://www.math.ucla.edu/~aoleg/wp/rfa/edit_summary.cgi?user=Oleg_Alexandrov (btw impressive), but does it take the project name also? --Eddi (Talk) 01:07, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
Sorry if Bold Edit woke you up, but...
Best wishes FrankB 05:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
HAPPY EASTER ! Broken redirectOn March 4, you created the article De Bruijn diagram with the content "#REDIRECT [[De Bruijn diagram]]." (You'd be surprised how often this happens!) I've unsuccessfully attempted to determine what the correct redirect target is. Please fix this link if you can. Thanks. --Russ Blau (talk) 13:11, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Audio templateI went to some other sites like dictionary sites that have pronunciation links, and they all like to create popup windows. I don't like that, so I added a span class to the template so the extra info could be manipulated, and wrote a little proof-of-concept javascript to make the extra info into a box that pops up within the page. (It actually took me a lot more time than I expected, so I gave up on actually writing it and just made settled for a visual mock-up.) ;-) You can try it by adding this to User:Oleg Alexandrov/monobook.js: document.write(
'<st' + 'yle type="text/css"> ' +
' div.audiolinkbox { ' +
' border:2px solid rgb(170,170,170); ' +
' background-color:rgb(250,250,250); ' +
' position:absolute; ' +
' margin:-1.2em; ' +
' display:none; ' +
' } ' +
'<' + '/style>'
);
addOnloadHook(function () {
function lightup () {
this.parentNode.nextSibling.nextSibling.style.display="inline";
}
function lightout () {
this.parentNode.nextSibling.nextSibling.style.display="none";
}
/* Get all the span tags */
spans = document.getElementsByTagName('span');
/* go through them all */
for (i=0;i<spans.length;i++) {
/* If the span is class audiolinkinfo */
if (spans[i].className.indexOf("audiolinkinfo") != -1) {
/* Put it in a box */
box = document.createElement('div');
box.className="audiolinkbox";
spans[i].parentNode.insertBefore(box,spans[i]);
box.appendChild(spans[i]);
/* Remove the parentheses */
insidebox = spans[i].firstChild
for (j=0;j<insidebox.childNodes.length;j++) {
if (insidebox.childNodes[j].textContent == "(" || insidebox.childNodes[j].textContent == ")") {
insidebox.removeChild(insidebox.childNodes[j])
}
}
/* Add the hover thing to the regular link */
spans[i-1].firstChild.onmouseout=lightout;
spans[i-1].firstChild.onmouseover=lightup;
}
}
});
It strips the parentheses, moves the extra info into a box and then hides the box until you roll your mouse over the audio link. That way the links aren't obstructive, the extra info is still there, etc. For people without javascript, it will just appear as it currently appears, so someone who is actually a good programmer could make a good version and we could put it in the site-wide javascript. You can't click on the links because they disappear when you move your mouse towards them, but someone writing a real script could fix that easily enough. :-) You can still see what it would look like. This would be trivial for User:Lupin, I bet (Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups). — Omegatron 01:58, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
Your views regarding integration notationI remember from somewhere that you felt the Leibinz notation for integrals was inadequate and you had something better in mind. Is this true? Loom91 16:04, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Mathbot at fr wikiI tried using mathbot for my French wiki account (Jacques d'Eduard) and didn't get any results. Does mathbot work on that wiki?•Jim62sch• 14:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
MathbotHey, I'm "New Pages" patrolling and I saw some of Mathbot's articles and had a question; is it meant to be making articles with just 3s in them? I know that may sound stupid, but it doesn't make a great deal of sense to the non-math editor. Cheers, Highway Rainbow Sneakers 23:13, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Another use for MathbotHi, Oleg. There's a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Work via Wikiprojects that asks for something that is very similar to what Mathbot does currently. If possible, could you comment on whether the request is technically feasible? Titoxd(?!? - help us) 00:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
lesbian sistersYeah, that was pretty funny. I had to take it to BJAODN. Cheers. -lethe talk + 05:36, 23 April 2006 (UTC) discontinuous linear functionalBy the way, I've been wanting to say this to you for a while. I'm kinda drunk now, so I guess now is as good a time as any. I really enjoyed working with you on the article discontinuous linear functional. I felt a little guilty at the time, a little as though I blundered into an article that you owned and started making sweeping edits which at best drastically changed the focus of the article, and at worst introduced mathematical errors. I've seen editors get very upset when the articles that they "owned" got subjected to all the humiliations that are part of the wiki process, to the extent of leaving the project or threatening legal action. You, on the other hand, were always courteous, I thought, and receptive to suggestions. Level-headed, even in the face of blundering stupidity on my part. In the end, I learned some new things in the process, and finally put to rest this disconcerting disquiet that I've had since learning that the derivative is not continuous. Anyway, my point is, I'm quite pleased with the end result, and I hope you are too. I consider our collaboration on that article the high point of my wikipedia career to date. So thank you for your patience and your cooperativeness. Therefore I give you a barnstar.
PS. For the record, I'm really not a constructivist. I like the axiom of choice, and in general favor richer universes of sets (I prefer also ¬GCH and ¬V=L). Nevertheless, I live in eternal fear of the day when a student will ask me "OK, so show me an example of a discontinuous linear functional". It is important to know that such examples can never be written down in an elementary way, so that when I'm asked that question, I can just say something like "for technical set-theoretic reasons that I won't go into, these functions exist but cannot be demontrated". -lethe talk + 08:09, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Maths articlesHello Oleg. you were very quick to notice Quasi-Hopf algebra. I'm just wondering if I have been writing them in the right way? Is there too much pedagogical comment in the "usage" section, or should there be more discussion rather than just a technical statement. Feedback would be good. I also started Heisenberg model (quantum) and Quasibialgebra. Regards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 05:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC).
Mathbot adapted for WP:1.0?Hi Oleg, Thanks for your input so far for use of the Mathbot in WP1.0. I have a couple of questions about how this might work: As I understand it, the bot would crawl through some talk pages within given categories, and record some parameters from those talk pages, viz Assessment and Change of Assessment. Is this right?
Are these two things possible? Are they fairly easy to do? We have a dataset of around 555 assessed chemistry articles we can use as a test, if you think it can be done. Many thanks, Walkerma 06:33, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Walkerma and Tito. I looked at the categories, and it will be easy enough to read in the categories like Category:A-Class hurricane articles and modify the tables in the appropriate sections of Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/WPArts with the current assessment and the date the assessment was updated. I will also create a log of changes. By the way, could you tell me a page to serve as log? As far as I can tell, Tito wants me to use {{assessment}} to create rows in those tables at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/WPArts. But for now {{assessment}} is empty. So we can do two things. Either I don't use that template, and complete rows in the tables the way things are now, like: | Stargate (device) || April 12 2006 || class="assess-a " style="color:inherit; background: #66ffff; text-align:center; " | or otherwise that assesment template is created, and for uniformity all the tables in the Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/WPArts page are modified to use it. I would prefer the former, that is, not using the template, as the syntax in that table row I display above is simple enough. Wonder what you think. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 15:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
I understand you're an administratorbut RfA, huh, what a place for you and me to boink heads! :) (That is, meet each other suddenly, not argue over nothing...we're on the same side, i.e. I'm with the Croats ;) ) --VKokielov 15:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
I expect VKokielov meant bonk heads. I hope so anyway. Well, on third thought, why do I care? --Trovatore 16:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Request for edit summaryThanks for the reminder! I was just being lazy, thinking that it might be ok since I already set the "minor edit" flag. I'll try to write a summary next time.--Tong 07:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC) Question about policyHi, I was wondering if you could quickly look at the page UniModal/proposed to see if it violates wikipedia policy. I've been arguing with an admin who replaced the original content with a redirect to Personal Rapid Transit - he says it violates NPOV and undue weight - but I don't think it does. In any case, I'm not asking you to get involved (unless of course you want to : ) but I'm just wondering if I'm way off base - after all, I am arguing with an admin. Thanks. Fresheneesz 02:02, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
List of mathematical redlinks ?I don't understand the page User:Mathbot/List of mathematical redlinks (P) First of all, I can't seem to find anything on Wikipedia that explains what a redlink is. (One gets a general notion from the name, implicitly.) The redlink page redirects to no-help page. Red link, as you can see, is itself a red link!! (Bluelink and Blue link are too.) Moving on from redlink, what is a "List of mathematical redlinks"? The page does not say what it is or shows or accomplishes. If the list has no meaning to Wikipedia users, then maybe it should be stored offline. Every page that is referenced by this page points back to it ("What links here"). Very few of the links on the page are red -- almost all of them are blue! Should it be that way? Is it time to regenerate the page?? Does Mathbot read that page, or only write the page? (That is, if someone edits the page, are they wasting effort?) If Mathbot only writes the page, then the page should contain a comment saying so. It should be easy to update the page. No need to visit each link -- just examine the rendered HTML page to see what color each link is. The format of the list renders it non-useful. The contents all run together. It only needs a comma or a newline after each item in the list. Whiner01 02:41, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Re the whole de-bureaucrating thingHi, I never came to thank you for the message you left for me a month ago when I stepped down from being a bureaucrat. Thank you for the things you said, it's good to know there are still plenty of good people about in this project. I do not see myself standing for bureaucrat again anytime soon though who knows what the future may bring! Thank you once again. -- Francs2000 |
![{\displaystyle \forall x\exists y\left[x\in I\land y\in J\to x+y\in I\times J\right]}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/49e6f4cf56dad066da24c2f6608ed78a04c6fe06)
![{\displaystyle ={\frac {1}{2}}\sum _{k=3}^{\infty }{\frac {1}{(k+1)\ln 2+\ln[({k+1})\ln 2]\quad }}}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/2de5801b1647b22e624d6dfef3c827fb77d5c3e1)
![{\displaystyle \sum _{n=6}^{\infty }{\frac {1}{n\ln n+n\ln \ln n\quad }}\geq \int _{7}^{\infty }{\frac {1}{2x\ln x}}=\left[{\frac {1}{2}}\ln \ln x\right]_{7}^{\infty }=\infty }](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/a798bf7e045409110e7ac62e169fd04f095b8933)
