This is an archive of past discussions with User:RLO1729. 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.
For your excellent contributions to Agatha Christie (and other articles of yours that I had the pleasure to review) via your impeccable collaboration with Tbytheriver. This must not have been a simple job for an article like this, and you guys have set an amazing example! It was a pleasure reviewing a beautiful article on my favorite author :) All the best for your future endeavors. Sainsf·(How ya doin'?)14:12, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
For excellence in editing the Agatha Christie article. Your skills and commitment to this project over the past six months are the key reasons this article has achieved GA status. Tbytheriver (talk) 16:02, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
On 22 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Agatha Christie, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that public reaction to Agatha Christie's eleven-day disappearance in 1926 included speculation the incident was an attempt to frame Archie Christie, her then husband, for murder? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Agatha Christie. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Agatha Christie), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.
On 22 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Agatha Christie, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that public reaction to Agatha Christie's eleven-day disappearance in 1926 included speculation the incident was an attempt to frame Archie Christie, her then husband, for murder? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Agatha Christie. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Agatha Christie), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. 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.
Hi user:RLO1729, I think the theorem statement is well written and the diagram very nice and essential. I have written one small article like yours: Bottema's theorem and contributed to this other one: Van Aubel's theorem. I am also not a professional mathematician but I do my best to contribute to geometry. Best Regards; Count Von Aubel (talk) 14:11, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Count Von Aubel. The articles you mention are interesting, I've made some suggested revisions to the Bottema article, happy to discuss any of the changes if you'd like. (I am a professional mathematician, just not a geometer.) Cheers ~ RLO1729💬02:14, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Dear RLO1729, many thanks. And I am very sorry for my misunderstanding that relegated you between the not-professional mathematicians. I saw those minor changes, of course I am completely fine with them. I am not a native English speaker (I assume you are - but sorry for an eventual second misunderstanding), so my exposition might be not so good sometimes, but I see that here in wikipedia many other editors help a lot. Of course your revision over my work will be very much appreciated. About this Conway circle, it is really true that I wanted to add that page as I am a bit interested in circles pertinent to various geometrical configurations. I was very surprised back at the first year of University (Space Engineering) when I read about the Nine-point circle. I have written a paper about a circle pertinent to the quadrilateral configuration, I hope you find it interesting, if you have the will to have a look at it: https://ijgeometry.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/5-13a.pdf (it is a reference I added at the Van Aubel's theorem). Best Regards; Count Von Aubel (talk) 06:41, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Many Thanks RLO1729. Well, I do not know, I did not look at that possible path, for laziness and difficulty. I enjoy very much the synthetic method. Starting with a more complex configuration, maybe the analytical-algebraic approach could be better (and this one I enjoy less!). There's a famous theorem that goes in that direction: the Petr–Douglas–Neumann theorem but does not go for circles. Instead, I went backwards the other way, the simple one, to see what happens when the quadrilateral degenerates in a triangle and indeed I have found, in my opinion, some interesting results. These can be found in the current latest issue of the International Journal of Geometry: On a Six-Point Circles Family for the Triangle, if you are interested. Sorry if it seems I am doing self-advertising, I am only an amateur geometer in the end. Somehow I got this interest from secondary school! Best Regards; Count Von Aubel (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
And sorry I was forgetting, that six-point circle, it does not matter if the quadrilateral is convex or not. It works for any quadrilateral, re-entrant or self-intersecting! Best Regards; Count Von Aubel (talk) 08:31, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
MOS:INOROUT
Hello:
I found this example in the MOS which clarifies for me the use of quotations with a period as discussed in the MOS: "If the quotation is a single word or a sentence fragment, place the terminal punctuation outside the closing quotation mark. When quoting a full sentence, the end of which coincides with the end of the sentence containing it, place terminal punctuation inside the closing quotation mark."
LaVesque's report stated: "The equipment was selected for its low price. This is the primary reason for criticism of the program."
LaVesque's report said that "the equipment was selected for its low price".
I shall be correcting the punctuation in Agatha Christie, where necessary, to conform to this as I do my final vetting of the article.
Excellent, many thanks Twofingered Typist. I also wondered about the revision of spaced dashes to unspaced dashes. If this is a stylistic preference rather than grammatical, could we go back to the original spaced dashes please? (I could do that after you have finished your edits.) You're doing a great job on the article, thanks for working through it so carefully. :) ~ RLO1729💬23:03, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Agatha Christie
Hello:
I have now finished my copy edit of the article Agatha Christie. Do let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Another editor removed all the spaced en dashes where they appeared in quotations. I could not revert their edits so had to go back through the article to restore them. I think I caught every instance. I certainly have no problem with you replacing em dashes. That editor also "fixed" the spacing in many citations. I left that alone.
Sorry to see you are retiring. I'm most impressed with your portfolio, and would like to thank you, from encounters with some of your pages, for the outstanding quality of your work on the lives of various biologists: they are exemplary, and produce pages that feel that I can trust Wikipedia to be a reliable and well-ordered source of information.
Foiled circuitous wanderer (talk) 07:24, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
