User talk:Michael Hardy/Archive7 and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Coordinators: Difference between pages

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Michael Hardy
(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
 
Sephiroth BCR (talk | contribs)
25,432 edits
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WP Film Sidebar}}{{Shortcut|WT:FILMC}}{{bots|deny=SineBot}}
{{Talkback|L'Aquatique}}


= Handbook =
* [[User talk:Michael Hardy/Archive1]]
* [[User talk:Michael Hardy/Archive2]]
* [[User talk:Michael Hardy/Archive3]]
* [[User talk:Michael Hardy/Archive4]]
* [[User talk:Michael Hardy/Archive5]]


== Career Entry ==
== Open tasks ==


:''These tasks should be done as often as needed—ideally, on a daily basis.''
Hello M Hardy. I saw that you contributed to the "Career" entry and I am interested in printing the article (or a similar article) for reference/background in a student publication. I am hoping you can guide me to it in its original state. (You are the earliest contributor with whom I have the option of Talking.) If you wrote it, or know where it exists outside of Wikipedia, I would be much obliged.


; Assessment
Best, Voorhees
* Monitor the daily [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Film articles by quality log|assessment log]]. The main things to look for:
[[User:EliVoorhees|EliVoorhees]] ([[User talk:EliVoorhees|talk]]) 02:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
** Articles being removed. This is usually legitimate (due to merges or non-film articles getting untagged), but is sometimes due to vandalism or broken template code. Also note that even though the banner and tags remain on the talk page, assessing a Future-class will remove the article from the bot's listing.
** Articles being moved to "GA-Class" and higher quality. These ratings need to correspond to the article's status in the GA and FA lists, as well as our A-Class review.
** All newly added articles should be quickly scanned to see if additional task force tags or other maintenance tags (such as "needs infobox") are required.
* Deal with any new [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Assessment#Requests for assessment|assessment requests]], [[:Category:B-Class Film articles needing review|B-class articles needing review]], and the [[:Category:Unassessed film articles|unassessed articles]].


; Peer review
* For each new peer review request:
*# Add the review to the {{tl|WPFILMS Announcements}} template.
*# Leave a note on the main project talk page, and with each appropriate task force or contact (if any), using the following boilerplate: <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/Peer review notice]]<nowiki>|Name of article}} ~~~~</nowiki></code>
* For each peer review that has been archived:
*# Remove the review from the {{tl|WPFILMS Announcements}} template.
*# Check the talk page to see that the parameter has been changed from "peer-review=yes" to "old-peer-review=yes".


; A-Class review
== Archive of Fourier transform Talk page ==
* For each new A-Class review request:
*# Add the review to the {{tl|WPFILMS Announcements}} template.
*# Leave a note on the main project talk page, using the following boilerplate: <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/A-Class review notice]]<nowiki>|Name of article}} ~~~~</nowiki></code>
*# Leave a note with each appropriate task force (if any), using the following boilerplate: <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/A-Class review notice]]<nowiki>|Name of article}} ~~~~</nowiki></code>
* For each ongoing A-Class review:
*# If a review has been open for two days without at least three editors commenting, leave a reminder note on the main project talk page, using the following boilerplate: <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/A-Class review alert]]<nowiki>|Name of article}} ~~~~</nowiki></code>
*# If a review has been open for four days, close and archive it.
* For each A-Class review that has been archived:
*# Remove the review from the {{tl|WPFILMS Announcements}} template.
*# If the article was promoted to A-Class (or demoted from it), add it to (or remove it from) the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films#Showcase|project showcase]].


; Featured content
Hi, the [[Talk:Fourier transform|Fourier transform Talk page]] is now rather long and I believe that at least the content related to discussions up to 2005 (possibly also 2006) could be moved to an archive subpage. I dont't know if this is an admin-task or can be done by non-admins. Any advice? --[[User:KYN|KYN]] 17:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
* For each new [[WP:FAC|featured article candidacy]], [[WP:FAR|featured article review]], [[WP:FLC|featured list candidacy]], [[WP:FPCAN|featured portal candidacy]], and [[WP:FTC|featured topic candidacy]]:
*# Add the candidacy or review to the {{tl|WPFILMS Announcements}} template and the corresponding section in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Review|review department]].
* For each concluded [[WP:FAC|featured article candidacy]], [[WP:FAR|featured article review]], [[WP:FLC|featured list candidacy]], [[WP:FPCAN|featured portal candidacy]], and [[WP:FTC|featured topic candidacy]]:
*# Remove the candidacy or review from the {{tl|WPFILMS Announcements}} template and the corresponding section in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Review|review department]].
*# If the article, list, portal, or topic was promoted to featured status (or demoted from it), add it to (or remove it from) the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films#Showcase|project showcase]].


; Member outreach
: You don't need to be an administrator to do that. Maybe I'll do it if no one beats me to it.... [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 01:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
* Welcome anybody who joins the project, using the following boilerplate: <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Outreach/Welcome]]<nowiki>|~~~~}}</nowiki></code>
* Update [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Outreach/{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}} Newsletter]] with new developments within the project.
<!--* Monitor and vote on [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/Awards|proposals to award the ''WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves'']] and [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Contacts‎|applications to become a subject-area contact]]. -->


; Other
In that case I'll make a try for it, and have already posted an announcement on the talk page. Thanks. --[[User:KYN|KYN]] 15:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
* Fix the {{tl|Film}} syntax on any articles in [[:Category:Incorrectly tagged WikiProject Films articles]]. The main culprits are the following:
*#Deleted peer-review or old-peer-review parameters. Restore as appropriate.
*#No WP Films peer review subpage. This usually occurs when editors turn on the peer-review tag in our banner but use the main [[WP:PR|peer review]] page. Open the banner, click on the peer review redlink, and redirect the page (Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Peer review/Foo film) to the original peer review page (Wikipedia:Peer review/Foo film).
*#Changed page name. Do as above, but redirect to the wherever the original peer review was.
*#Start or Stub articles that meet all of the B-Class parameters. Check the article to see if they actually do. If not, change the relevant parameters. If they do, then reassess the article to B-Class.
*#A-Class articles which have not passed A-Class review. (To be effective shortly when the dormant parameter is activated.) Re-tag down to GA (if already earned) or B.


==One-time tasks==
==Henry Balfour Gardiner==
:''These tasks are targeted housekeeping drives which require immediate attention only once or infrequent maintenance.''<!--I will be limiting this to no more than one new addition per week, generally speaking, unless irregular tasks are completed unusually quickly.-->
{{{icon|[[Image:Information.svg|25px]] }}}Hello, and thank you for your contributions to [[Wikipedia]]! I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article{{{{{subst|}}}#if:Henry Balfour Gardiner|, [[:Henry Balfour Gardiner]]}}. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying [[Help:Talk page|talk page]]. If you post your comments there, other [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|editors]] working on the same article will notice and respond to them and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:uw-talkinarticle --> &ndash; [[User:Zedla|Zedla]] 00:31, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
* '''Task force tagging''' - several task forces are in need of comprehensive "search and tag" runs so that the vast majority of their articles are identified and tagged. Most notably the following:
**War films
**Film awards (well-tagged, but needs a more thorough follow-up)
**Film festivals (well-tagged, but needs a more thorough follow-up)
* Retagging all instances of {{tl|FilmsWikiProject}} to {{tl|Film}}. '''Very''' low-priority.


== Toolbox ==
: My comment was commented out so that readers of the article would not see it, and it was located EXACTLY where those working on the article could best make use of it. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 00:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)


===New task force ===
==Anti-gravity==
:'''''N.B.''': Creating a task force involves a great deal of work, and is very time-consuming to reverse if an inappropriate or misnamed group is created. It is generally inadvisable to create task forces without prior discussion—particularly regarding the name and scope—on the [[WT:FILMS|project's main talk page]].''
Michael Busch has requested a straw poll of [[Anti-gravity]]. You may want to add your comments. [[User:Tcisco|Tcisco]] 01:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


Before a task force can be created, it is necessary to decide on a name for it. The process requires both a full name (e.g. "French cinema" or "Film festivals") and a one- or two-word or acronym shorthand used for some template parameters (e.g. "French" or "Festival"). The instructions below use the "Fooish cinema" task force (shortened to "Fooish") as an example; when creating an actual task force, remember to substitute the correct name, rather than actually creating the example pages.
== Page move requested for [[rope length]] --> [[ropelength]] ==


# Create the task force page:
Hi I have a new account and cannot move pages yet (also it was moved once before). I noticed you edited the article and appear to be an admin. Please see my reasoning and data on [[Talk:Rope_length]] which you can verify for yourself. "Ropelength" is just much more common as a knot-theoretic term than "rope length". Thanks. --[[User:Horoball|Horoball]] 02:08, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
## Create the main task force page ([[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Fooish cinema task force]]) with <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/Task force]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema|Fooish}}</nowiki></code> as the content.
## Fill in the "Scope" section on the new task force page.
## Create the task force talk page ([[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/Fooish cinema task force]]) with <code>{{tl|WPFILMS Sidebar}}</code> as the content.
# Add support for the task force to {{tl|Film}}:
## Select an image to use as the task force icon. The image should be recognizable at a small size and reasonably representative of the topic of the task force.
## Add the task force display code (shown below) to the task force section of {{tl|Film}}, in correct position among the task force parameters. If the name of the task force does not begin with a capitalized term—in other words, where the name would be lowercase if it were not a page title (e.g. "military aviation" or "maritime warfare")—an <code>altname=</code> parameter containing the lowercased version of the name must be passed to {{tl|Film/Task force categories}}.
##: <code><nowiki>{{!}}-</nowiki></code>
##: <code><nowiki>{{#ifeq:{{{Fooish-task-force|}}}|yes|</nowiki></code>
##: <code><nowiki>{{!}} style="width: {{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|28px|43px}};" {{!}} [[Image:Fooimage.png|{{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|28x20px|43x30px}}|center]]</nowiki></code>
##: <code><nowiki>{{!}} [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Fooish cinema task force|Fooish cinema task force]]<includeonly>{{Film/Task force categories|name=French cinema|class={{{class|}}}|importance={{{importance|}}}}}</includeonly></nowiki></code>
##: <code><nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>
## Add <code><nowiki>{{{Fooish-task-force|}}}</nowiki></code> to the appropriate conditional statements in the template.
## Update the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Project banner|project banner instructions]]:
### Add "<code>|Fooish-task-force=</code>" to the example syntax, in correct position among the task force parameters.
### Add "<code><nowiki>* '''Fooish-task-force''' – "''yes''" if the article is supported by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Fooish cinema task force|Fooish cinema task force]].</nowiki></code>" to the instructions, in correct position among the task force parameters.
# Set up the task force assessment infrastructure:
## Create the main task force category ([[:Category:Fooish cinema task force articles]]) with <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force category|WPFILMS Task force category]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema}}</nowiki></code> as the content.
## Create the main task force assessment category ([[:Category:Fooish cinema articles by quality]]) with <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment category|WPFILMS Task force assessment category]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema}}</nowiki></code> as the content.
## Create the assessment level sub-categories:
### [[:Category:FA-Class Fooish cinema articles]] with <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|WPFILMS Task force assessment level category]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema|FA}}</nowiki></code> as the content.
### [[:Category:FL-Class Fooish cinema articles]] with <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|WPFILMS Task force assessment level category]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema|FL}}</nowiki></code> as the content.
### [[:Category:A-Class Fooish cinema articles]] with <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|WPFILMS Task force assessment level category]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema|A}}</nowiki></code> as the content.
### [[:Category:GA-Class Fooish cinema articles]] with <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|WPFILMS Task force assessment level category]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema|GA}}</nowiki></code> as the content.
### [[:Category:B-Class Fooish cinema articles]] with <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|WPFILMS Task force assessment level category]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema|B}}</nowiki></code> as the content.
### [[:Category:Start-Class Fooish cinema articles]] with <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|WPFILMS Task force assessment level category]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema|Start}}</nowiki></code> as the content.
### [[:Category:Stub-Class Fooish cinema articles]] with <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|WPFILMS Task force assessment level category]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema|Stub}}</nowiki></code> as the content.
### [[:Category:List-Class Fooish cinema articles]] with <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|WPFILMS Task force assessment level category]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema|List}}</nowiki></code> as the content.
## Add the task force's statistics table (<code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment|WPFILMS Task force assessment]]<nowiki>|Fooish cinema}}</nowiki></code>) to the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Assessment#Task force statistics|task force statistics table]] in the assessment department.
# Set up the task force's open tasks listing:
## Create the task force's open task template ({{tl|WPFILMS Announcements/Fooish cinema}}) using the syntax shown on {{tl|WPFILMS Announcements/Task force}} as the content. At a minimum, the <code>name=</code> parameter must be set to "<code>Fooish cinema</code>"; optionally, some initial tasks should be located and added to the listing.
## Add the new template to the "Task force lists" section of {{tl|WPFILMS Announcements}}; the column break should be moved, if necessary, to keep the two columns properly aligned.
# Set up the task force's userboxes:
## Create the task force userbox ([[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Outreach/User WPFILMS Fooish cinema task force]]) with the following content, using the same image as was used in {{tl|Film}} above:
##: <code><nowiki><div style="float: left; border:solid #C0C090 1px; margin: 1px;"></nowiki></code>
##: <code><nowiki>{| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: #F8EABA;"</nowiki></code>
##: <code><nowiki>|-</nowiki></code>
##: <code><nowiki>| style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: wheat; text-align: center; font-size: 14pt; color: black;" | [[Image:Fooish_image.png|45x45px]]</nowiki></code>
##: <code><nowiki>| style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em; color: #000000;" | This user is a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Fooish cinema task force|'''Fooish cinema task force''']] of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films|WikiProject Films]].</nowiki></code>
##: <code><nowiki>|}</div></nowiki></code>
## Add the following to the userbox listing at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Outreach#User banners and userboxes]], in proper order among the other task force userboxes:
##: <code><nowiki>|-</nowiki></code>
##: <code><nowiki>| <tt><nowiki>{{</nowiki></nowiki><nowiki>[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Outreach/User WPFILMS Fooish cinema task force]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki></nowiki><nowiki></tt></nowiki></code>
##: <code><nowiki>| {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Outreach/User WPFILMS Fooish cinema task force}}</nowiki></code>
# Add the task force to the project's navigation system:
## Add a link to the task force to the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films#Task forces|"Task forces" section]] of the main project page.
## Add a link to the task force <!--and the talk page--> to the appropriate task force section of {{tl|WP Film Sidebar}}
# Announce the new task force:
## Add an announcement of the new task force page to the "Announcements" section of {{tl|WPFILMS Announcements}}, and to the discussion of the task force proposal on the project's talk pages (if any).
## Add the task force to the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Culture#Films|"Films" section of the WikiProject directory]]; add cross-reference links to any other sections into which the task force falls.


=== Boilerplate and templates ===
==Meetup in Minneapolis==
:''mostly "Film"-ified...''
<hr style="background:#fc6; border:#0cf 10px dotted;">
{| class="collapsible collapsed" style="width: 100%; border: 1px solid silver; margin-bottom: 1em;"
<div style="float:left; padding:10px 10px 0 0; clear:left">[[Image:Flag of Minnesota.svg|100px]]</div><div style="float:left; clear:none; padding:10px"><div style="font-size:150%; padding-bottom:0.5em">Minnesota Meetup</div><div style="font-size:100%">Sunday, [[2007-10-07]], 1:00 p.m. (13:00)<br />[http://www.saintanthonymain.com/pracna.html Pracna on Main]<br />117 Main SE, Minneapolis, Minnesota<br />[http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=%22pracna+on+main%22&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=36.452734,77.255859&ie=UTF8&ll=46.377254,-92.460937&spn=31.793982,77.255859&z=4&iwloc=A&om=1 Map]</div></div><div style="font-size:120%; float:right; padding:10px">Please pass this on! [[Wikipedia_talk:Meetup/Minneapolis#2007_meetup|RSVP here.]]</div>
|-
<hr style=" clear:both; background:#fc6; border:#0cf 10px dotted;">
! style="text-align: left;" | Public boilerplate notices
<div style="clear:both; font-size:xx-small; text-align:right;">Spam delivered by -[[User:Susanlesch|Susanlesch]] 16:31, 30 September 2007 (UTC)</div>
|-
| style="padding: 1em;" |
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/A-Class review alert]]<nowiki>|X}}</nowiki></code>
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/A-Class review notice]]<nowiki>|X}}</nowiki></code>
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/Peer review notice]]<nowiki>|X}}</nowiki></code>
|}


{| class="collapsible collapsed" style="width: 100%; border: 1px solid silver; margin-bottom: 1em;"
|-
! style="text-align: left;" | Public templates
|-
| style="padding: 1em;" |
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Archive|WPFILMS Archive]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment|WPFILMS Task force assessment]]<nowiki>|X|second_project=Y}}</nowiki></code>
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment category|WPFILMS Task force assessment category]]<nowiki>|X|second_project=Y}}</nowiki></code>
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|WPFILMS Task force assessment level category]]<nowiki>|X|second_project=Y}}</nowiki></code>
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Task force category|WPFILMS Task force category]]<nowiki>|X|second_project=Y}}</nowiki></code>
|}


{| class="collapsible collapsed" style="width: 100%; border: 1px solid silver; margin-bottom: 1em;"
|-
! style="text-align: left;" | Hidden structural templates & boilerplates
|-
| style="padding: 1em;" |
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Toolbox/Banner]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Toolbox/Newsletter boilerplate]]<nowiki>|...}}</nowiki></code>
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>subst:[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/Task force]]<nowiki>|X}}</nowiki></code>
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:Film/Class|Film/Class]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki></code>
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:Film/Task force categories|Film/Task force categories]]<nowiki>|X}}</nowiki></code>
* <code><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Template:WPFILMS Announcements/Task force|Film Announcements/Task force]]<nowiki>|X}}</nowiki></code>
|}


==Impressive==
== Notes ==
Project issues
* Weekly open task collab
* explicit IMDb guideline
* character notability clarification
* class-specific advice in the banner for how to get to the next level
* "medal of honor"-level award reserved for coordinators to confer (coordinators will not be eligible to receive while in office)
* next election round approaching, do we need more coordinator spots?
* expanding the style guidelines to cover a broader range of subjects, massaging them in preparation for formal MOS review
* specific future film tasks
* implementing core contest; creating a contest dept for this and other tasks
* member questionnaire?
* A-Class review, dealing with current A's


=Discussion=
Just thought I'd mention my amazement when I came across your name on the wikidragon page, and tracked you a bit.
{{archive box|
You seem to be one of the few remaining legendary wikidragons. This is my primitive version of a big fat smiley face graphic on your page, beacause I don't know how to make one of those.
* [[/Archive 1|Tranche I (October 2007-April 2008)]]
* [[/Archive 2|Tranche II (April 2008-September 2008)]]
}}


== Brief note ==
[[User:Zantaggerung|Zantaggerung]] 03:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


I apologize for having not formally addressed the new coordinators yet - other affairs online and offline have prevented this. I hope to have time later today and rectify this with a proper introduction and comprehensive report on where we stand, as well as some proposals for future initiatives.
Nevermind! I just learned how!
<div style="float:center; border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[Image:Smiley.svg|left|62px]]


I also am somewhat sorry that the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Wikipedia 0.7|0.7 contest]] was created without prior consultation, but the imminent deadline of the 0.7 release version's publication forced my hand; plans were already in the cards to apply something similar to the [[WP:FILMCORE|core department]] over time, so this will afford us a test-run. Nehrams had also laid the groundwork of a review table to identify individual article problems - the contest is merely a logical extension to this work. Please do not view the quick release as an attempt to prevent critique, however - I am happy to discuss any changes either here or on the contest's talk page. Adjustments made mid-stream are not ideal, but in this particular case, we'll have to make that sacrifice if need be. Thanks, [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 11:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
{{{1|[[User:Zantaggerung|Zantaggerung]]}}} has smiled at you! Smiles promote [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! {{{2|}}} <br /> Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
:Excellent work, it looks much better than it was before. I think we still need a section for the revisions, since we need to determine those by October 20th. If there are people that are improving the articles before then that should be fine, and we can start choosing revisions just a few days before the deadline. I believe we should see a lot of progress in the coming months for these articles. --[[User:Nehrams2020|Nehrams2020]] ([[User talk:Nehrams2020|talk]]) 18:46, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
</div><!-- Template:smile -->
::Wow, I actually didn't realize we needed to be ready ''that'' soon. Should we create some sort of additional incentive to get the editors to focus on tagged articles? [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 18:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Yeah, that's why I was in such a hurry to try and set all of this up. I really don't know why they gave the projects only a month's notice, especially for the projects that had several hundred articles to cover. What did you have in mind for the additional incentive? --[[User:Nehrams2020|Nehrams2020]] ([[User talk:Nehrams2020|talk]]) 02:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
::::Not really sure - which I guess is why I'm asking. Hmmm, [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 08:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
:::::I guess we could divert some of the awards for raising the classes to completing the revisions. Maybe use Tireless Contributor, Working Man, and Diligence barnstars but require a larger amount of revisions to be completed (first level could be 10-20). Whatever we can do to get people to help with the revisions will really help out for looking over the 200 articles. --[[User:Nehrams2020|Nehrams2020]] ([[User talk:Nehrams2020|talk]]) 19:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
::::::Forgive my confusion, but to what does the December 1 deadline refer, if the revisions that are going to be used need to be selected by October 20? [[User:Steve|<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">'''Steve'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Steve|T]] • [[Special:Contributions/Steve|C]]</sup> 19:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
:::::::The December 1st deadline is just an indicator of how far the articles have improved in a few months (we probably didn't want to drag out this drive over a year, so three months away seemed like a reasonable ending point). However, based on the success of the drive, we may likely do similar drives, especially for our other core articles. Finding the revision is a separate thing then improving the articles (although if the articles improve before the October 20th deadline, we will have better revisions to provide for the 0.7 release). --[[User:Nehrams2020|Nehrams2020]] ([[User talk:Nehrams2020|talk]]) 19:53, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
::::::::That does clarify matters. The current wording at [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Wikipedia 0.7|the 0.7 contest page]] ("...before the scheduled publication of Wikipedia 0.7 currently set for December 2008") makes it sound as if we have until then to improve/tag revisions of these articles for 0.7, when October 20 is the cutoff and December just an arbitrary end to the improvement drive. Thanks. As for incentives, does Wikipedia still frown upon cash rewards? :) [[User:Steve|<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">'''Steve'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Steve|T]] • [[Special:Contributions/Steve|C]]</sup> 21:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
:::::::::Steve, you may want to check out [[WP:REWARD]]. Not sure if that is anything we can formalize... I don't quite have the budget to persuade editors to improve some articles. :) —<font face="Palatino Linotype">[[User:Erik|Erik]]</font> ([[User talk:Erik|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Erik|contrib]]) - 21:44, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
'''Question''' As one of the new coordinators, I should ask: what else should we be focusing on for our coordinator duties? Thanks. [[User:Ecoleetage|Ecoleetage]] ([[User talk:Ecoleetage|talk]]) 21:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
:I apologize for my lack of promptness, which I hope to emend shortly after I return from a work commitment. This will be clarified, I promise. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:41, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


== Topic workshop ==
[[User:Zantaggerung|Zantaggerung]] 03:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)


I've been working on [[User:Sephiroth BCR/Film topic workshop draft|a draft]] of the [[WP:ANIME/TW|topic workshop]] I made for [[WP:ANIME]] and adapting it for [[WP:FILM]], and am nearly done. Any commentary on the workshop itself before I finish it and set into motion? Basically, the general idea is that you have a centralized place to propose topics, and they can receive input from the community, as well as garner more visibility and help. — <font face="Segoe Script">[[User:Sephiroth BCR|<font color="navy">'''sephiroth bcr'''</font>]]</font> <font face="Verdana"><sup>'''([[User talk:Sephiroth BCR|<font color="blue">converse</font>]])'''</sup></font> 22:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
: Thank you. I didn't know I was listed there. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 02:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


:Looks like a terrific start! My only major concern about the effectiveness of this topic workshop is that, well, it's really hard to get a group of articles under a topic up to Good Article status. Film series seem to be the only plausible approaches. I was also wondering about something -- you mention that any upcoming film article is inherently unstable (which I agree with), so if there was a topic related to an actor or a director, would an article about an upcoming film disrupt a featured topic? For example, my personal idea for a featured topic had been director [[Neil Marshall]] with ''[[Dog Soldiers (film)|Dog Soldiers]]'', ''[[The Descent]]'', and ''[[Doomsday (film)|Doomsday]]'', but if he began a fourth film, what happens? —<font face="Palatino Linotype">[[User:Erik|Erik]]</font> ([[User talk:Erik|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Erik|contrib]]) - 22:34, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
== Thank you ==
::Looks good to me. I actually [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Alien#Potential_good_topic_candidate|suggested to WikiProject Alien]] last week to link together multiple articles into a good topic, since there are already several film articles that are GA/FA status. I'm sure it would fall under our project as well. --[[User:Nehrams2020|Nehrams2020]] ([[User talk:Nehrams2020|talk]]) 23:02, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
::I would echo Erik's observation. Does it make sense to be proactive and suggest possible subjects for consideration? Or should we be reactive and see what suggestions flow in? [[User:Ecoleetage|Ecoleetage]] ([[User talk:Ecoleetage|talk]]) 00:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
:::<small>(To Erik)</small> Yes, topics are hard to produce ([[User:Sephiroth BCR/Accomplishments#Featured topics|I know, I've made three]]), but this is why we have a centralized place to work on them. And if there was an upcoming film, it would be "audited", meaning that the article would go through a peer review with exhaustive commentary that would address any problems with the article. This would qualify the article as part of the topic. This is done in cases of articles/lists that cannot become good articles or featured lists for whatever reason (television series that has not finished airing, film in production, video game that has not been released). And if you made a topic on Marshall and he made a fourth film, then you would be given about three months to bring the article up to snuff so it can be audited and included in the topic. After the film is released, you would have six months to improve the article to GA. I'm just saying the difficulty is in the updating that you have to do and the work involved in keeping the topic up-to-date. As for what types of topics, yeah, beyond film series and filmographies, the only other potential topics that come to mind are awards-related topics (I have one posited around the [[Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film]] planned). That said, with the way the workshop is set up, people are free to suggest their ideas, and can receive input to see whether it is a viable topic or not. In this manner, we're not necessarily static in the form of topics we can create (although a majority will ultimately be series/filmographies or similar).
:::<small>(To Eco)</small> Both are intended. Anyone can propose topics, so we can propose a few and leave it open for everyone to contribute. IMO, filling it up with too many topics dilutes resources, but we definitely shouldn't feel hesistant about bringing ideas forward. — <font face="Segoe Script">[[User:Sephiroth BCR|<font color="navy">'''sephiroth bcr'''</font>]]</font> <font face="Verdana"><sup>'''([[User talk:Sephiroth BCR|<font color="blue">converse</font>]])'''</sup></font> 07:51, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
::::If I could propose a topic, I think we need get some serious editing on the films directed by [[Orson Welles]]. I've already done significant expansions on [[The Immortal Story]] and [[The Trial (1962 film)]], created a new article on [[The Dreamers (unfinished film)]], and I hope to sandblast the article on [[Macbeth (1948 film)]]. I will probably do an expansion of [[Filming Othello]], which I created as a stub some months ago. I've looked at articles on Welles' unfinished [[The Other Side of the Wind]] and his lost [[Too Much Johnson]] and both (I feel) are terribly written; the article on [[The Stranger (1946 film)]] could probably use expansion, too. For a filmmaker of Welles' significance, the level of scholarship on Wikipedia relating to his canon appears wobbly and often lacking. I wouldn't mind generating some sort of project-wide enthusiasm to clean up these articles. [[User:Ecoleetage|Ecoleetage]] ([[User talk:Ecoleetage|talk]]) 12:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
Another question as I consider possible featured topics... what about [[James Dean]] and his three films? He has been on stage and in television as well. Can the actor and the three films make up a featured topic or not? Just trying to understand the extent of the topic boundaries. —<font face="Palatino Linotype">[[User:Erik|Erik]]</font> ([[User talk:Erik|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Erik|contrib]]) - 23:53, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
:Yes. You define the scope of the topic at the start, and if you want it to be "Films James Dean acted in" (bad title, just a throwaway), then that's the scope you've set for yourself. Do note, however, that the main article has to establish a clear basis for a topic (aka, you can't cherry pick; for instance, "Films James Dean acted in before 1956", which would exclude [[Giant (film)]], is not appropriate). — <font face="Segoe Script">[[User:Sephiroth BCR|<font color="navy">'''sephiroth bcr'''</font>]]</font> <font face="Verdana"><sup>'''([[User talk:Sephiroth BCR|<font color="blue">converse</font>]])'''</sup></font> 23:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Correction: Dean ''starred'' in three films, but he had small roles and bit parts in other flicks. That could be part of a James Dean happening here. [[User:Ecoleetage|Ecoleetage]] ([[User talk:Ecoleetage|talk]]) 12:54, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
::As an FYI, I just did a massive rewrite of Orson Welles' lost film [[Too Much Johnson]]. I am a bit surprised that the non-Kane Welles articles have been problematic. I will get to "Macbeth" later next week. [[User:Ecoleetage|Ecoleetage]] ([[User talk:Ecoleetage|talk]]) 16:45, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
:::I think that articles like these are problematic because the topics do not stand out as much. I think that our base of editors at WikiProject Films is relatively young, and if you look at our [[WP:FILMSPOT|spotlight]], there's a lot of recent films that achieve some kind of status. In addition, for older films that may not be highlighted by the media as much, research may be harder to conduct. You can see the lack of content in the WikiProject's [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Core|core list]] with all the Stub-class and Start-class articles. I've considered creating a resources subpage to address this... to both list possible resources and to provide a forum so people can request assistance in researching a topic. —<font face="Palatino Linotype">[[User:Erik|Erik]]</font> ([[User talk:Erik|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Erik|contrib]]) - 17:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
::::A central area to point out possible resources for articles would be a great idea. It would allow other members who have access to university databases, libraries, member-only websites, museums, etc. to be able to assist in providing sources in improving article content. This could further improve our numbers in GAs/FAs if members knew where they could find more information for a particular article. --[[User:Nehrams2020|Nehrams2020]] ([[User talk:Nehrams2020|talk]]) 17:31, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
::I am not certain about research problems for older films. There might be more of a comfort level in writing about more recent films versus a title from the 1930s. I believe Erik's idea of a list of resources is an excellent idea, since I find myself returning to a select number of online sources for many of the articles I write and edit. [[User:Ecoleetage|Ecoleetage]] ([[User talk:Ecoleetage|talk]]) 19:07, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
:::As an FYI, I wanted to see Wikipedia's coverage of the Orson Welles unfinished film version of "Don Quixote," which recently had its US DVD debut -- and there is no article on the subject. I am going to create one, as that void is fairly remarkable and needs to be filled. [[User:Ecoleetage|Ecoleetage]] ([[User talk:Ecoleetage|talk]]) 14:32, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


== Belated welcome ==
I did not see that μ was the mean of the log in [[log-normal distribution]]. [[User:Acct4|Acct4]] 16:58, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


I apologize for not being able to make an introductory address to the new coordinators earlier - some unexpected offline commitments left me with too little time earlier to properly gather my thoughts and address you all with sufficient depth.
== How NOT to fix a double redirect ==


First of all - congratulations on being elected! I am deeply honored to be working with each of you, and I'm very pleased to see that we've yielded such a strong field of coordinators, all of whom I am familiar with as regular, thoughtful contributors to our endeavors. Perhaps the proof in the pudding is that you've already gotten off to a strong start, as the discussions already begun here clearly evidence! :) This is also, of course, something our expansion has helped facilitate, and I look forward to seeing the coordinator talk page truly becoming a place of collaboration, brainstorming, and initiative-taking.
<nowiki>
#REDIRECT[[estimation lemma]]
</nowiki>
:
<nowiki>
If [[ML inequality]] ever becomes an article rather than a redirect, then this
page should be changed to redirect to that.
</nowiki>
----
The redirect page titled [[ML Inequality]] currently reads as above. To change the '''second''' link to "estimation lemma" makes no sense at all. Please don't do that. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 17:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
:The bot processed the list at [[Special:DoubleRedirects]].
:Any link1 → link2 → link3 will become link1 → link3
:This is the recommended action as per [[WP:2R]]
:I am uncertain what exactly the problem is. Consider using {{tl|softredirect}}
:--<small> [[User:White Cat/07|Cat]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:White Cat/07|chi?]]</sup> 18:51, 7 October 2007 (UTC)


Let me get a few of the sterner items of the agenda out of the way first:
I've never seen a clearer case of unwillingness to understand. Please look at what the page says. Look at the '''profoundly stupid''' form in which your bot left the page. Look at my edit that fixed the problem. My edit is consistent with the policies you cite, so you should have no objection to it on those grounds. On the other hand your edit obviously defeats a purpose that helps Wikipedia. "Softredirect" is for a different purpose. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 23:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
#All coordinators '''must''' have this page added to their watchlist if they haven't already. We shouldn't have to be calling for you, and your self-nomination presumes that you want to be regularly involved here, so please do make it easier by keeping your eye on the discussions. (Contributing regularly wouldn't hurt either! ;)
:My bot processes data as it appears on [[Special:DoubleRedirects]]. Anything beyond that is not my problem. If there is something wrong with [[Mediawiki]]'s [[Special:DoubleRedirects]] page, that is a bug with [[Mediawiki]], not my bot.
#One of the responsibilities we've formally incorporated into the position starting with this term is that all coordinators are expected to perform a regular amount of service in the Review department reviewing items which appear there. The highest prior items are the A-Class reviews - this is because they not only require a minimum of three support votes, but also because coordinators are formally written into that review process to administer to it. This is particularly relevant at the moment, as we have three articles in review, one of which has been drawn out far too long - and we are all responsible for this, myself included. The A-class reviews must be processed faster, in order to keep them a useful option. The second priority is reviewing any items which have no garnered any critiques yet. Beyond that, just keeping your hand in is still important, as it keeps coordinators up-to-date on what deficiencies we're seeing in articles, and how we can address them ahead of time. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
:From what I can see the bot is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. You are creating a self redirect chain by [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ML_Inequality&diff=162896198&oldid=162822298 linking] to a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ML_inequality&diff=162390521&oldid=116041284 redirect page] (from a redirect page) and hence cluttering [[Special:DoubleRedirects]].
:What is the purpose of linking to [[ML inequality]] on [[ML Inequality]] (mind the case difference).
:--<small> [[User:White Cat/07|Cat]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:White Cat/07|chi?]]</sup> 23:17, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I disbelieve your statement that your bot's absurd edit is required by that page. Damage done by your bot IS your problem. Why do you ask what the purpose is? The purpose is obvious. Don't come to me citing policies that say different things from what you claim they say. I have no problem with fixing double redirects; if that's '''ALL''' your bot did I'd have no problem with it. But it did something else. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 23:31, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
:Look closely. you are/were linking to a redirect from a redirect. That is a double rediretc as far as mediawiki is concerned. You should not be having wiki-links on a redirect aside from the actual redirect link. Use an html link if you must - or just create a stub. Please stop fighting mediawiki. --<small> [[User:White Cat/07|Cat]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:White Cat/07|chi?]]</sup> 00:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm not fighting mediawiki; you're fighting common sense. You say "That is a double redirect as far as mediawiki is concerned". That defies common sense. Policies exist for a reason.
:
And if you're against even that kind of so-called "double redirect", why didn't you just remove the link, so the words would appear there with no link, instead of replacing it with something absurd and incomprehensible? [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 03:12, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


===New business===
:Take it to ANB/I. I have nothing to add here. With the amount of words you have told me you could have simply started a stub. --<small> [[User:White Cat/07|Cat]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:White Cat/07|chi?]]</sup> 13:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
====Tag and Assess drive====
This project has not yet undergone a Tag and Assess drive, which is quite unusual for a WikiProject of this size. Is this warranted at the moment? If so, how shall we proceed, and is anyone interested in organizing it? [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


====Task force coordination====
::This would be quite simple to fix by simply telling the bot not to edit the page that ''is'' the redirect in question. Instead, it can remove the square brackets that make a link. I tend to agree with Michael that the bot's edits in this case defy common sense; they are just the result of your bot's loigc not handling this case in a reasonable manner. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 14:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Would it be advisable for task forces to be directly under the purview of one or two coordinators each? This would give the task forces direct points-of-contact for any issues they need assistance with, and also allow the coordinators to regularly evaluate their needs and suggest common solutions here as need be. I also think that this may be crucial for upcoming tasks that we really need to finally get around to, such as style guidelines for articles that aren't about individual films, as well as assessment standards for those articles, notability and naming guidelines, and specialized infoboxes. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Simplistically usage of a template solves the problem: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ML_Inequality&diff=163104934&oldid=162972219]. Why is it so hard to do that? --<small> [[User:White Cat/07|Cat]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:White Cat/07|chi?]]</sup> 15:12, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


====Organizations task force====
== [[template:Redirect future article]] ==
I'd like to create a task force to cover articles on Organizations, Schools, Institutions, Companies, etc. Much of this is currently tagged under the Filmmaking task force (although not all are), and it seems to actually be more appropriate to group these together, as they will have a more common structure and content. This could also be a joint task force with other relevant WikiProjects such as [[WP:COMPANIES|WikiProject Companies]] and [[WP:ORGZ|WikiProject Organizations]]. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


====V0.7 revisions selection====
I hope this template meets your needs. Had I understood the exact problem sooner I would have offered this solution sooner. Does this completely meet your needs?
This is urgently looming, since we have a deadline of October 20th, IIRC. Anyone interested in helping out with this will be greatly appreciated. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


===Old business===
Also it may perhaps be better to tag the redirects talk page. This is merely a thought.
(Much of this is verbatim from the last time these were brought up.)
====Questionnaire====
Many of our editors - and by extension, the project - seem to get active in fits and starts, and in some of our key areas, such as assessment and reviews, go from moribund to busy back to moribund again without much rhyme or reason. Others, like CotW or Translation just died outright. I've been considering creating some new departments such as Contests and perhaps even a rotating open task (see below), but maybe it would be worth polling our members first to find out more about what drives their participation. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


====IMDb guideline====
The key problem is, it takes a lot of resources (time wise) for bots to process a lot of text on redirect pages. Even in their bald form 200 redirects can take a good 2-4 hours to process especially when wikipedia is slow. If there is extra text on redirect pages, that is an extra strain on bots. A handful of redirects wouldn't have an impact but if "lots of pages" contain extra text thats lots of extra strain. With this I was merely expressing my standpoint.
Has the encyclopedia made it apparent enough that the IMDb is not a reliable source? It seems a common stumbling block for so many editors that they can't rely on the site, and yet there isn't much in the way of a formal declaration to the effect. Also, should this go into the style guidelines, be thrown to RS, or perhaps be elsewhere? [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


====Character articles====
--<small> [[User:White Cat/07|Cat]]</small> <sup>[[User talk:White Cat/07|chi?]]</sup> 18:12, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Do characters who only appear significantly in one work actually justify independent articles? [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
:If they have enough coverage to satisfy the [[WP:GNG|general notability guideline]], then I see no reason why they shouldn't have articles. How many serialized works is largely irrelevant in comparison to the notability the article asserts. You could have a character present in one media that is notable due to sufficient coverage and have a character present in five media that is not notable due to insufficient coverage. The only implication that appearances in several media conveys is that there is a greater possibility sources can be found to assert notability. — <font face="Segoe Script">[[User:Sephiroth BCR|<font color="navy">'''sephiroth bcr'''</font>]]</font> <font face="Verdana"><sup>'''([[User talk:Sephiroth BCR|<font color="blue">converse</font>]])'''</sup></font> 05:42, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


====Future films updating====
==Comment requested==
We've discussed adding additional parameters into the template to identify a Future-Class film's release date, so as to help automate re-assessment, especially for less-mainstream releases. This is also crucial since Future-class articles "go dark" on the assessment logs, which makes it difficult to track them otherwise. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, you might be interested in [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human chemistry]]. Comments are welcome. [[User:TimVickers|Tim Vickers]] 20:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


====Open tasks====
== G. Whitehead ==
Would it be worth exploring the option of having a weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly open task collaboration amongst the members? The regular shift in focus would break up the monotony, while only featured one at a time would also reduce the sense of being overwhelmed which members may otherwise feel if confronted with the full scope of remaining work. Additionally, we have recently overhauled the project banner to fully deprecate the separate "needs" banners into project banner parameters. Should this sort of task be split amongst members, or is it too admin-ish to spend their time on? [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


====Banner revision====
Thanks! I was beginning to wonder how long it would take someone to get the hint. [[User:R.e.b.|R.e.b.]] 04:14, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I believe that Erik had proposed adding some additional "needs-X" parameters to the project banner. Additionally, Nehrams and I discussed expanding the "how to get the article to the next class" sub-templates to include more than the Stub and Start classes. And as per above, non-film articles will require these to be re-written for their type of content. (This can probably be handled in conjunction with specific task force parameters, such as Festivals, Awards, or Filmmaking.) [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


====Contests====
== George W. Whitehead ==
The contest department may be forthcoming, primarily in order to provide incentives for working on the Core articles. We could also provide general contests for general article improvement, as well as open task collaborations or other assessment drives. Thoughts on how to best run these are definitely wanted. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


====Peer review====
The article was created at 23:11 October 8 2007, and the hangon tag was added at 23:32. I deleted the article at 23:46, because it was only a one-liner (easily a CSD A1) and I thought (incorrectly, apparently) that there was not an assertion of notability. I'm sure if this was not your area of expertise, you might have made the same judgment call. <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 11:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
The wiki-wide peer review overhaul seems to have optimized their reviews past what we can offer, and gives the benefit of more eyes on the PR. Is it worth us maintaining a wholly separate process, or should we just transclude the general PRs within the Review department PR section? [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
:Also, if the user places a hangon tag on an article, then it is their responsibility to actually provide their reasons for keeping the article on the article talk page. I would think 15+ minutes is enough to make this assertion if this subject is clearly notable. <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 11:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
::By the way, I did restore the backlink [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Homotopy_groups_of_spheres&diff=prev&oldid=163208908 here], so I did recognize the possible notability of the subject. <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 15:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


====Style guidelines====
:Easly a CSD A1? No context? How is saying so-and-so is a mathematician who invented [[J-homomorphism]], no context? Would you also CSD A1 an article that consisted of "so-and-so is a baseball pitcher who pitched a [[no-hitter]]"? There is just as much context there. In both cases there is a claim that a professional of a certain type did something worth having a Wikipedia article about. If you make a mistake deleting fine, but what is worrisome is that you don't seem to realize you made a mistake out of ignorance. Instead you seem to have the attitude that it's something that clearly would be deleted. You also say there was no "assertion of notability". What CSD criterion is that? A7? Nope, that explicitly says not about notability. I think it would be wise to carefully read over the criteria and actually apply them strictly. Don't just make up a reason to justify some feeling that an article should be deleted. --[[User:Horoball|Horoball]] 17:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
The task forces which focus on film-related topics are in desperate need of their own style guidelines. Expansion of our MOS, infoboxes, templates, etc to standardize these articles is going to be a continuing concern and possible hindrance to their ability to create viable FAs without some guidance beyond the ad hoc. Identifying key members of these task forces also will help. [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


===Other comments===
The problem is you should judge an article to lack an assertion of notability only if you KNOW there is none, not simply if you don't understand it. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 17:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Please feel free to address them here.
:I think you're being too hard on the deleting admin here. A7 is about whether it is clear ''just from reading the article'' that the person is notable. We can't assume the deleting admin will know which parts of advanced mathematics are important and which are not, or to research the subject of the article to decide whether it asserts importance. It's not really a burden to start each article with four or five sentences that clearly explain why the person deserves an article. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 17:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


Again, I look forward to seeing everyone work together here, and I have very good feeling that we'll get a great deal accomplished! :) [[User:Girolamo Savonarola|Girolamo Savonarola]] ([[User talk:Girolamo Savonarola|talk]]) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
::No, A7 is not about notability. Please read the criterion again, where it explicitly says it's not about notability. Besides, Nishkid64's reasoning is A1 not A7. I would like to see some consistency in the reasoning given by people supporting the speedy deletion. --[[User:Horoball|Horoball]] 17:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
:::I'm quite familiar with the CSD criteria, and the way that they are applied in practice. I think you are misreading my comment above. If an article can be deleted under two different CSD criteria, that's a stronger argument for improving it. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 18:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Any time you read an article on a subject with which you are not familiar, you may fail to understand why it's notable, no matter how well explained it is. That's not enough reason to conclude it doesn't assert notability. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 17:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
:I agree that some people won't see an assertion of notability even in a 1000 word article, and we can point out that they are being stubborn. But a one-sentence article that only states that a person conducted research using jargon that I don't recognize, without explaining why this is important, is a different matter than a 1000 word article. As a mathematician, I am likely to be more patient with jargon than the average admin.
:In practice, to avoid deletion, the text of a new article needs to clearly point out that the subject is important in a way that an average admin can clearly understand. I realize that there was a time when one-sentence stubs were normal, and even encouraged. But that's is no longer the case. My interpretation is that the encyclopedia is at a point where the need to create new articles is not as strong as before, and the requirements on new articles have increased accordingly. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 18:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
::I used A1 as a backup claim. Apparently, Michael Hardy says A7 shouldn't apply, so I reaffirmed my position with CSD A1. I admit A7 was a mistaken rationale for deletion. The article has been restored. All is fine. Michael, stop badgering me on this deletion or other deletions. <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 19:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I do not think [[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] is mature enough to have the priviledge to speedily delete articles. The article creator has made a valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Rather than waiting and seeing what comes out of it, Nishkid64 "would think 15+ minutes is enough to make this assertion if this subject is clearly notable". And what harm would be inflicted if it were 24 hours, and not 15 minutes? For example, for me personally, almost any significant edit takes at least one hour. This comment itself reveals that Nishkid64 is more interested in asserting his ego, by abuse of authority, if necessary, than in maintaining high standards of articles on Wikipedia, which should have been his motivation. Additionally, making up reasons to back up one's past actions contravenes the process where there are clear criteria under which the decision has been based. You can't go down the list of possible explanations saying "Ok, someone didn't like X for the reason, then let me quote Y, Z, and W instead to reaffirm my position". Rather than "reaffirming a positon", it is "reaffirming the absence of a position as well as the relativity of the judgement". Not a good trait for someone entrusted with making unilateral decisions whose soundness is unreviewable by anyone save a minority of editors.

By Wikipedia's rules, if someone, anyone, decides to put a speedy deletion tag on it, whether good-heartedly or out of malice, the author should not remove it, all he can do is to put a "hangon" tag. In the case at hand, the author not only put the hangon tag, he also posted a note on the math project page to alert other people with the knowledge of the subject (anyone other than the author is allowed to remove the speedy deletion tag). Clearly, the intention is not to punish people for creating articles, it is to filter out inappropriate content. How do you determine that the content is appropriate? Here are a couple of quotes from the official policy [[WP:CSD|"Criteria for speedy deletions"]] (with emphasis added):

: ''Where reasonable doubt exists'', discussion using another method under the deletion policy should occur instead.
: Before nominating an article for speedy deletion, consider whether it could be improved or reduced to a stub; if so, speedy deletion is probably inappropriate. Contributors sometimes create articles over several edits, so ''try to avoid deleting a page too soon after its creation if it appears incomplete''. Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criteria the page meets, and consider notifying the page's creator.
: '''Very short articles'''. Short articles with sufficient content and context to qualify as stubs ''may not be speedily deleted under criteria A1 and A3''; other criteria may still apply.

Thus, in case of doubt the prudent thing to do seems to leave it alone and wait for the author's or an expert reaction first. And having made a mistake, one should admit to it gracefully. [[User:Arcfrk|Arcfrk]] 18:45, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
:And one shouldn't be attacking the deleting admin who admitted earlier to having made a mistaken call on the CSD A7. <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 20:40, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
::And a request: will people just drop the matter already? The article has been restored. There's nothing more to see. <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 20:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

==George Whitehead==
<div style="background-color:#EEFFFF; border:1px solid black; padding: 0.3em;">
''On [[User talk:Bobo192]], [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] said:''<br/>Your sandbox link to George Whitehead now links to a disambiguation page listing three men of that name. None of the three is a cricketer, so if you create a stub called George Whitehead (cricketer), then you should add that name to the new disambiguation page. (This came to my attention only because I created the dab page and then clicked on "what links here".)
</div>


Thank you very much for your note. I have changed the link accordingly. If you come across any other links on my page which need fixing on my sandbox, please feel free to do so.

I do occasionally check a certain number of the bluelinks to articles for which I know I'm not responsible, but I hadn't gotten around to checking this link as yet. When I focus more on article creation than I am currently doing, I shall make sure to double-check links. [[User:Bobo192|Bobo]][[User talk:Bobo192|.]] 18:20, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

== "Derrick Gardner" article deletion ==

It meets [[WP:CSD#G12]]. The entire text (all except the last line) is taken from CD Baby. That is grounds for speedy deletion. If the user who created this article (and a number of other articles that were deleted as copyright infringement and/or have notability issues) wants to recreate the article, then he/she may do so. <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 19:36, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
:Also, did you happen to see the article's history? Hangon tag was added 15:03, I deleted at 15:57. Adding a hangon tag does not mean administrators have to sit around until the author argues his case on the talk page. The article can be deleted if it's clear the article meets speedy deletion criteria, regardless of whatever persuasion the author can muster up. <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 19:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Even if it is grounds for speedy deletion, it is still no reason to say that it "unquestionably" violates copyright. The word "unquestionably" was used. That is nonsense. You can't conclude that under those circumstances. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 22:34, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
:I didn't say that. That's what the policy says for CSD G12. <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 23:28, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
::If you think it needs to be changed, then go ahead and change [[WP:CSD]] or discuss it on the talk page. <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 23:29, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

==AfD nomination of [[List of Jewish American fashion designers]]==
[[Image:Circle-style-warning.svg|left|48px|]]An article that you have been involved in editing, [[List of Jewish American fashion designers]], has been listed for [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deletion]]. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/{{{2|List of Jewish American fashion designers}}}]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:adw --> [[User:Stifle|Stifle]] ([[User talk:Stifle|talk]]) 21:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

==CSD==
I was not aware of the prior post when I wrote that. --'''<span style="background:Black;color:White">&nbsp;[[User:Bsf|<font color="White">But</font>]]|[[User talk:Bsf|<font color="White">seriously</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/Butseriouslyfolks|<font color="White">folks</font>]]&nbsp;</span>''' 03:45, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

== [[Quantum logic]]==


Could you help me figure out what happened to the revision history of the quantum logic article? In the recent renames, it got obliterated. I also sent [[User:John Baez|John Baez]] a note. The original rename is probably where the disappearance occurred. Thanks. --[[User:CSTAR|CSTAR]] 15:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

: OK I resolved the problem.--[[User:CSTAR|CSTAR]] 20:47, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

== Merger proposed: Missouri Collegiate Mathematics Competition → Mathematical Association of America ==

It has been proposed to merge the content of [[Missouri Collegiate Mathematics Competition]] into [[Mathematical Association of America]]. Since you have previously edited one of these articles, I thought you might be interested. You're welcome to [[Talk:Mathematical Association of America#Merger proposed (Missouri Collegiate Mathematics Competition)|participate in the discussion]] if you like. --[[User:B. Wolterding|B. Wolterding]] 16:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

== Comment ==

"It is certainly not true that I have ridiculed this user nor am I going about attacking his every deletion. I have, however, paid some attention to his deletions after I noticed that his talk page has complaints from various users about his excessive haste in deleting articles. Michael Hardy 02:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)"
:If you have noticed, anyone who does deletions gets bombarded by complaints from new users. They expect their articles will be on Wikipedia because they fail to comprehend policy regarding notability. Also, you saw only one deletion complaint on my user talk page. That matter was quickly handled, because it was indeed copyright infringement (according to [[WP:CSD]] policy). <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 16:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


==Fair use rationale for [[:Image:Cover2 nature.jpg]]==
Thanks for uploading or contributing to '''[[:Image:Cover2 nature.jpg]]'''. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under [[Wikipedia:Fair use|fair use]] but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to [[:Image:Cover2 nature.jpg|the image description page]] and edit it to include a [[Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline|fair use rationale]].

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "[[Special:Contributions/{{PAGENAME}}|my contributions]]" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Di-no fair use rationale-notice --> NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. [[User:STBotI|STBotI]] 19:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

== Ivor Wilks ==

It said "Ivor Wilks is a noted British Africanist, with a specialism in Ghana." Please tell me where the claim of notability is. It was a valid A7 speedy, and that's why it was deleted as tagged; if you believe that it should not have been speedied then you might want to talk to the admin who clicked the Delete button. Or not; after all, I did tell Johnbibby what the problem was: lack of any sources, claim of notability, or "hook" to tell anyone why they shold care.

As to "people like me", you have absolutely no idea. None whatsoever. And I don't think I'm going to enlighten you. But I don't think your attacking me for daring to add an A7 tag to a non-article like this is going to change anything. Your analogy was pointless. Do you really think that Ivor Wilks and William Shakespeare have anything close to parity of name recognition? It was a silly example. Of course I don't know who Ivor Wilks is, and the article didn't tell me who he is or why I should want to know, but please be assured that I unquestionably would know William Shakespeare from a hole in the ground, whichever spelling of his name he was using that day. I'd also recognise Francis Bacon or Kit Marlowe for that matter, provided you gave me one of the better-known portraits to identify.

So please do resist the temptation to rudeness and sarcasm - it looks from Nishkid's coment above that this is not the first time you have fallen into this trap. You may well be an ardent inclusionists, inclusionist admins are good, and I have no problem with assuming good faith and helping Johnbibby out, but you really ought to recognise that the main issue here lies with his original article: "''foo'' is a noted ''bar''" is classic A7 material, since there is no tangible or referenced claim of notability. I take it you have read [[WP:BLP]]? It does make quite a point of sourcing for biographical articles. [[User talk:Cruftbane|Cruftbane]] 06:54, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

: I repeat: you did not use common sense and you should have. The content that was there would have told you that google would settle the matter in seconds, and so it did. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 15:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

:: You are being rude, and unnecessarily so. People who write articles that say "John Does is a professor" and then act hurt when somebody tags it as A7, are more of a problem that the people who tag them as A7. Completely unsourced articles on living individuals are a serious problem, and I'd say that applies even if they are half-sentence stubs. [[User talk:Cruftbane|Cruftbane]] 20:22, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Again I repeat: You did not use common sense and you should have. When you find something is validly tagged as A7, that's not when you should stop thinking about whether it should be deleted; it's when you shoud ''start'' thinking about that. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 21:35, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

* Again I repeat: you are being rude and aggressive, and completely failing to acknowledge that unsourced sub-stubs on living individuals that fail to make a proper claim of notability are fair game for A7 - which is ''why an admin deleted it on that basis'', so two people agreed there was a problem. And with that I'll bid you goodbye, since you clearly have no intention of admitting fault and neither do I. [[User talk:Cruftbane|Cruftbane]] 22:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
**Everyone, try to be a little more [[WP:civil|civil]] please. Comment on the edits, not the editors. <font face="Broadway">[[User:Mr.Z-man|<font color="#056366">Mr.</font>]]''[[User talk:Mr.Z-man|<font color="#056625">'''Z-'''</font><font color="#054F66">man</font>]]</font>'' 04:08, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

== Template correction ==

Thanks. :) --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] 00:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

== Zeisel number ==
Helmut Zeisel is an austrian Mathemacian. He is not famous and not lucky about naming this numbers after him. In the german Wikidia the Article "Zeisel-Zahl" was deleted after i wrote an AfD. I wouldn't delete "Zeisel-Zahl", but most of other Wikipedian, who wrote to the AfD, were for the deletion of that article. I wouldn't be lucky, if [[Zeisel number]] would delete here too. --[[User:Arbol01|Arbol01]] 14:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

==LSSA?==

MH, have you had a look at the ongoing mess at [[Least-squares spectral analysis]]? Any comments or edits you can contribute would be welcome. It's got a call for expert help on it (presently removed, but see talk page). [[User:Dicklyon|Dicklyon]] 04:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

== Mathematics of bookmaking ==

Thanks for all the Further Reading references... much appreciated.
Could I trouble you for a short comment at
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gambling#Concensus_for_re-directing_pages]? Cheers! [[User:AirdishStraus|AirdishStraus]] 22:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

== LEIS mess ==

Thanks for helping clean up the errors on the LEIS page last week. With regard to the leis/LEIS mixup, I had no idea Wikipedia links were case-sensitive, hence the horrible link. With regard to the same, I was under the impression double-redirects were disabled, so I was surprised to hear any other links (e.g. flowers, Hawaiian culture) would somehow have brought a reader to the page I was working on. Is this not the case? [[User:Runningamok19|Runningamok19]] 13:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Disregard-I was just thinking about this and realized it probably wasn't a double-redirect, but a link to leis which redirected to Lei (Hawaii). [[User:Runningamok19|Runningamok19]] 14:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

==Thank you and a request==
Thanks for restoring that page. I was just about to do that and had left a message to that effect on the author's talk page.

In future, please attempt to consult with me before reverting my administrative actions, particularly when the situation is not urgent. Thanks! --'''<span style="background:Black;color:White">&nbsp;[[User:Bsf|<font color="White">But</font>]]|[[User talk:Bsf|<font color="White">seriously</font>]]|[[Special:Contributions/Butseriouslyfolks|<font color="White">folks</font>]]&nbsp;</span>''' 02:15, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

== panjer recursion ==
thanks a lot for your help with [[Panjer recursion]] --[[User:Philtime|Philtime]] 10:54, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


==Redirect of [[:Military Sexual Trauma]]==
[[Image:Information_icon.svg|left]]Hello, this is a message from [[User:CSDWarnBot|an automated bot]]. A tag has been placed on [[:Military Sexual Trauma]], by {{#ifeq:{{{nom}}}|1|[[User:{{{nominator}}}|{{{nominator}}}]]&nbsp;([[User talk:{{{nominator}}}|talk]]&nbsp;'''·''' [[Special:Contributions/{{{nominator}}}|contribs]]),}} another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be [[Wikipedia:Speedy deletions|speedily deleted]] from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because [[:Military Sexual Trauma]] is a redirect to a non-existent page ([[WP:CSD#R1|CSD R1]]). <br><br>To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting [[:Military Sexual Trauma]], please affix the template <nowiki>{{hangon}}</nowiki> to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at [[WP:WMD]]. Feel free to contact the [[User:CSDWarnBot|bot operator]] if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself.''' [[User:CSDWarnBot|CSDWarnBot]] 08:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
==I put [[Benford's law of controversy]] up for afd==
regards, [[User:Richard L. Peterson|Rich]] 02:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
: I hope that [[Benford%27s_law_of_controversy#Benford.27s_law_of_controversy|"passion is inversely proportional to information"]] is saved from deletion. It may explain the movement which deleted the category Erdos Number. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] 19:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

== Variance ==

Hi Michael, could you please have a look at the Variance article? Someone deleted the "elementary description" section. I think that is a bad decision, because previously there were many complaints about the readability of the article. But I don't want to undo that action if I am the only person with that opinion.
Regards, Jules
[[User:JulesEllis|JulesEllis]] 04:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

== Commendable honesty ==

In this summary: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJzG&diff=168369950&oldid=168357004]. Yes, your comments were indeed disrespectful and abusive. Perhaps instead of merely identifying them as such you could have thought of a way of putting your point acroiss that wasn't abusive and disrespectful, but nobody's perfect I guess. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 21:25, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

: Very funny. You're edit summary said "can you say 'linkfarm', children?" I called that "disrespectful and abusive". That was my point. Was it unclear? [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 21:27, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

:: Yes, it was unclear. And the edit sumamry was associated with removal of... a link farm. Multiple deep links to the same site. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 21:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

== Nats & Bits in the Kullback-Leibler divergence for the multivariate normal distribution ==

Hi Michael,

I just made a small addendum to the equation for the K-L divergence for the [[multivariate normal distribution]] to indicate that the formula only works for nats and I suggested that to get to bits you need simply to divide by the natural logarithm of 2.

You swiftly changed what I wrote to state that a simple change of the base of the logarithm from e to 2 would give the correct answer in bits. While this is often the case in many formulas for information-theoretic quantities, I don't believe that's the case here. Try it for yourself in your favorite computing environment if you wish (I'm using Matlab). Simply changing the base of the logarithm gives you the wrong answer. I believe this is due to the fact that there are other quantities being added to the logarithm, so you must divide the whole expression by log_e(2).

Short of re-deriving the appropriate equation for bits, I think the best thing to do would be to suggest dividing by log_e(2).

Thoughts? Errors on my part?

Cheers,
Dylan <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/149.142.236.63|149.142.236.63]] ([[User talk:149.142.236.63|talk]]) 22:26, 31 October 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

PS Can you provide a reference for the formula?

Thanks!
Dylan <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/149.142.236.63|149.142.236.63]] ([[User talk:149.142.236.63|talk]]) 22:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: If you divide the natural logarithm of any number ''x'' by the natural logarithm of 2, you get the base-2 logarithm of ''x''. However, there may be complications here because of the additional non-logarithmic terms. I'll look at it more closely. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 23:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

:: Glad to see that you finally believe me! ;) I still think that it would be prudent to mention the subtlety of converting from nats to bits in this case, lest someone naively try to do it by simply changing the base of the logarithm (like I initially did!). Oh, and I also think it would be very nice to include a reference that has the derivation for the formula, since it is not something that is found in a standard text like Cover & Thomas, and it is not readily found with a Google search. --Dylan

== Conditional probability and expectation ==

I have replied to your message at [[User talk:Jmath666/Conditional probability and expectation]]. [[User:Jmath666|Jmath666]] 04:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

== AWB "clean up" ==

I was using AWB and didn't notice that ''x''² looks so bad. Sorry, I'll go back and revert those. [[User:Lantonov|Lantonov]] 05:51, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

: I think all (or most?) of them may have been taken care of. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 05:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

::Thanks, sorry again for the inconvinence. [[User:Lantonov|Lantonov]] 05:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem---just one of my particular points of sensitivity. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 05:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

== Logarithms ==

Sorry, I supposed n was the base. So, if someone has the correct picture... Maybe the best would be upgrade the picture on commons, because this stupid ln(0)=-1 graph is used in all languages wiki.[[User:Barraki|Barraki]] 20:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

== 'Delete and salt' ==

When the term 'salt' is used in a deletion debate, it normally refers to '[[WP:SALT|salting the earth]]' after deleting the page in question. By analogy with crop-growing, salting the earth prevents any new page from growing in its place, and it is done either by creating a blank or warning page and then protecting it from editing, or by placing the page title on the list of [[WP:PT|protected titles]]. This page has what is known as 'cascading protection' which means anything linked is also protected from editing, and is a way of preventing non-admin users from creating a new page. [[User:Sam Blacketer|Sam Blacketer]] 00:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

: Thank you. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 01:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

== Erdős numbers ==

I think you intended [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Deletion_review/Log/2007_November_7&curid=14171168&diff=170503682&oldid=170493356 this edit] to go at the new DRV at [[Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 November 10]]. -- [[User:Jitse Niesen|Jitse Niesen]] ([[User talk:Jitse Niesen|talk]]) 17:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

== history of computing ==

I'm going to fix the links into and out of [[history of computing]], unless you have some objections. I think you'll agree that the article is mislinked. See the talk page. ---- [[User:CharlesGillingham|CharlesGillingham]] 18:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

== [[Surfaces]] ==
Hello. As you have seen, I am attempting to put an elementary treatment of the results of Gauss et al in the section on the differential geometry of curves. It is aimed to be at a final year undergraduate level and does not use the language of forms or covariant differentiation.

It is almost impossible to get formulas looking OK in text using WP maths. I do not believe there are any hard and fast rules for mathematical type-setting, since including math symbols in text is always problematic. That is why it has to be most often entered as a mixture of text and math symbol, breaking every rule in the TeXbook.

Were you just referring to the insertion of extra lines and the use of the sup and sub commands? I appreciate your efforts to improve the look of the article, although that is not my main preoccupation at the moment.

A more complete (but of course never final) version will be up in a few days time for people to play around with. Cheers, [[User:Mathsci|Mathsci]] 10:14, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

: For simple inline math notation, non-TeX notation looks good if certain convetions are followed: italicize variables, but not digits and not punctuation; put spaces before and after "+" and "=" and ">" and the like (non-breakable "nbsp" spaces if line-breaks would upset legibility), use proper minus signs rather than stubby little hyphens (5&nbsp;&minus;&nbsp;3, not 5&nbsp;-&nbsp;3), and a few other things. For "displayed" rather than inline notation, I use [[TeX]] and it looks good. When TeX is inline rather than displayed, it often gets badly misaligned or is the wrong size---comically so. Mixing TeX with non-TeX notation on the same line often looks terrible. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] 19:09, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

== Appreciate your 2c on Talk:Evolutionarily_stable_strategy ==

Hi Michael, You've probably come across things like this before so, I was wondering if you could look at [[Talk:Evolutionarily_stable_strategy#.22Evolutionary_stable_strategy.22_vs._.22Evolutionarily_stable_strategy.22|this discussion]] (re: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Evolutionarily_stable_strategy&diff=169826399&oldid=168348566 this] edit and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Evolutionarily_stable_strategy&diff=169880020&oldid=169837611 reversion]). I do kind of agree with [[User:Bueller 007]], but not sure whether to address this with paragraph in article, or stick with current minimal mention, etc. ... Best regards, [[User:Pete.Hurd|Pete.Hurd]] 17:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

== Featured List of the Day Experiment ==

There have been a series of proposals to initiate a Featured List of the Day on the main page. Numerous proposals have been put forth. After the third one failed, I audited all [[WP:FL]]'s in order to begin an experiment in my own user space that will hopefully get it going. Today, it commences at [[WP:LOTD]]. Afterwards I created my experimental page, a new proposal was set forth to do a featured list that is strikingly similar to my own which is to do a user page experimental featured list, but no format has been confirmed and mechanism set in place. I continue to be willing to do the experiment myself and with this posting it commences. Please submit any list that you would like to have considered for list of the day in the month of January 2008 by the end of this month to [[WP:LOTD]] and its subpages. You may submit multiple lists for consideration.--[[User:TonyTheTiger|TonyTheTiger]] <small>([[User talk:TonyTheTiger|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/TonyTheTiger|c]]/[[User:TonyTheTiger/Antonio Vernon|bio]]/[[WP:LOTD]]) </small> 21:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
==License tagging for Image:Linksto.pdf==
Thanks for uploading [[:Image:Linksto.pdf]]. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags|image tag]] applied to the [[Wikipedia:Image description page|image description page]] indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
* [[Wikipedia:Image use policy]]
* [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags]]

This is an automated notice by [[User:OrphanBot|OrphanBot]]. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions]]. --[[User:OrphanBot|OrphanBot]] ([[User talk:OrphanBot|talk]]) 01:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

==Statistical survey or questionnaire?==
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Polychoric_correlation&diff=next&oldid=171949231 Your edit] is just fine by me. I was removing disambiguous links to [[survey]] and was making lots of similar decisions in a row. I considered [[statistical survey]], but chose the other. I'm happy to accept your improvement. [[User:SlackerMom|SlackerMom]] ([[User talk:SlackerMom|talk]]) 04:23, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

== [[Ren Potts]] ==

Thanks for your three edits to [[Ren Potts]]; I find it helpful to have someone else run their eye over an article I'm constructing.<br>I'm a bit puzzled by your third edit - I can't spot any difference between the before and after. Is there any difference?<br>(Or is it an extension of the puzzle on your user page? ;-) ) Thanks again, [[User:Pdfpdf|Pdfpdf]] ([[User talk:Pdfpdf|talk]]) 00:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

: In the third edit I put a blank space between each of several parenthesized expressions and the preceeding word. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 02:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

::Ah ha! (Far too subtle for me.) Thanks, [[User:Pdfpdf|Pdfpdf]] ([[User talk:Pdfpdf|talk]]) 03:00, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

== [[Weight space]] ==

Do you have any interest in merging [[weight space]] and [[weight (representation theory)]]? There was some discussion on the [[Talk:weight space]] page, and I copied it to [[Talk:weight (representation theory)]] after adding the mergefrom/mergeto tags.

I don't mind doing it, but it is certainly probable others have a deeper grasp. I would likely just cut/paste sections of weight space into weight, until weight space was empty. [[User:JackSchmidt|JackSchmidt]] ([[User talk:JackSchmidt|talk]]) 18:11, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

==Sigh?==
I know it can get tedious cleaning up the grammar and language of so many articles but don't [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Galician_wine&diff=172556979&oldid=172392887 sigh and despair]. Your efforts are, at least by me, appreciated. I know that my typing and grammar can be downright hideous and it the "wiki-gnomish" work of folks like you who do a great service to the project in making our articles more presentable to the world. Thank you and keep up the good work. [[User:Agne27 |Agne]][[Special:Contributions/Agne27|<sup>Cheese</sup>]]/[[User Talk:Agne27|<sup>Wine</sup>]] 23:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

: Hello. Thank you for the vote of confidence. "Refers to" is the most overused phrase on Wikipedia. A giraffe refers to when an animal has a long neck. Etc.... Maybe we need a "refers to"-bot. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 15:59, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

==Thanks==

for cleaning up Tidal resonances. [[User:David Webb|David Webb]] ([[User talk:David Webb|talk]]) 10:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

== Help wanted ==

Can you please look at [[Talk:Gamma distribution#Generating variables]]? -- [[User:Paul Pogonyshev|Paul Pogonyshev]] ([[User talk:Paul Pogonyshev|talk]]) 22:23, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

== Request ==

Hello Michael. Could you possibly look over the LaTeX formulas (mostly taken from Robert Kanigel's biography of Ramanujan) at [[Srinivasa Ramanujan]]? Also, someone [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srinivasa_Ramanujan here] commented that the integral in the "Contacting English mathematicians" section is incorrect. Could you look into that? The level of mathematics exceeds my educational background (I'm going to start multivariable next semester), so I would appreciate any possible assistance. Thanks in advance, <span style="background:#E0FFFF;color:#007FFF;font-family:Georgia;">[[User:Nishkid64|Nishkid64]] ([[User talk:Nishkid64|talk]])</span> 04:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

== Reply ==
Please mind [[WP:CIVIL]]; I will not inquire what you have or haven't read, and what is your level of education with regard to political sciences. While Germany is an interesting case, its division into zones was not followed by annexation of that territory into occupying forces. We would need to expand the article and find more refs to decide whether the term partition can be applied in the case of post-WWII Germany or not.--<sub><span style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus| Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ]]|[[User_talk:Piotrus|<font style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> talk </font>]]</span></sub> 01:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

== Re: Notation ==

Hi Michael,

Yup, I omitted to syntactify <math>-1</math> (or &minus;1), writing it as -1: hyphen vs. minus.
Normally I'm scrupulous about these (generally wrap everything in &lt;math&gt; and let MediaWiki handle it), but I was getting a bit tired -- thanks for the catch, and sorry for the bother!

[[User:Nbarth|Nbarth]] 03:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

== I ran into your request ==

[[Image:Lakewood Maus re-do.jpg|thunb|88px|left]]
for a better photo of the mausoleum at [[Lakewood Cemetery]] and decided to just photoshop the picture that was there. Although I've been to the cemetery and even posted a few monument shots, I did not get one of the Mausoleum. However I don't quite know how to do the copyright stuff since I don't want the person who took the original picture to get cut out. if you can figure out how to deal with that, well here is a slightly better version of the pic. [[User:Carptrash|Carptrash]] 21:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

== Constant ==

Hello,

You seem to know most of wikipedia's mathematical notational conventions (thanks for helping me with [[shift theorem]]). Could you help me out with the article [[constant]]?

Thanks, [[User:Randomblue|Randomblue]] 15:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC).

== Surface diffusion ==

Thanks for the math corrections in the article. I had been meaning to send you a message earlier regarding the article since there was a math redlink in the same name on a different page. I changed that link to surface diffusion (mathematics), knowing it had little or nothing to do with this materials science perspective. As a mathematician can you speak to the importance (or obscurity) of surface diffusion as a concept in math? [[User:Runningamok19|Runningamok19]] ([[User talk:Runningamok19|talk]]) 16:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

: I think many probabilists would find it to be of interest. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 17:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

== [[Nimbers]] contradiction ==

Howdy, I think you [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nimber?diff=164509032&oldid=164496369 reverted] a delete and said you would look into it. The delete was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nimber?diff=175917070&oldid=164509032 redone] today with a better explanation, and a comment [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nimber?diff=175920291&oldid=175917070 added] (to the article not the talk page). I reverted the last two edits because the first directly contradicted the cited sources and the second belonged on the talk page. However, surely [[Special:Contributions/195.69.84.154|195.69.84.154]] has some valid point worth making. I put my guess on [[Talk:Nimber]] and suggested how they could make a better version of their point (basically, by adding new material with a source, not deleting old material that has a source). Could you check on it again? Perhaps you will see a simple way to fix the edit or otherwise clear up the confusion. [[User:JackSchmidt|JackSchmidt]] ([[User talk:JackSchmidt|talk]]) 17:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

== hello ==

Hello Michael,

Long time no hear. I keep running into articles edited by you. Just now I looked up [[Pattern theory]], and sure enough, you were the last person to edit it. Thanks for the great work.

Where are you these days? I'm at CMU.

[[User:Guslacerda|Guslacerda]] ([[User talk:Guslacerda|talk]]) 23:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC);

: [[User talk:Guslacerda]]

== scriptstyle ==

Perhaps that's a problem with your browser? Or are you saying that in this particular instance the math characters are too big? Because otherwise, you'd have to add \scriptstyle to every inline math formula on Wikipedia. ;-) In other words, unless it's a problem with this particular formula, I'd leave it alone and wait for it to be fixed in MediaWiki. (It certainly does look too small in my browser if you add \scriptstyle.) -- [[User:Ddxc|Ddxc]] ([[User talk:Ddxc|talk]]) 18:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
: I've edited Wikipedia every day for more than five years, on a variety of different browsers, working on many thousands of mathematics articles, and the effect I've described always happens on all of them. (I have heard claims that there are exceptions, but I haven't seen one.) [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 18:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
==Proposed speedy deletion of Boubaker polynomials==
A tag has been placed on {{#if:Boubaker polynomials|[[:Boubaker polynomials]]|an article you created}}, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a {{#if:{{{2|}}}|discussion at [[:{{{2}}}]]|[[Wikipedia:Deletion debates|deletion debate]], such as [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|articles for deletion]]}}. If you can indicate how Boubaker polynomials is different from the previously posted material, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template {{tl|hangon}} '''underneath''' the other template on the article, and also put a note on [[Talk:Boubaker polynomials]] saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|criteria for speedy deletion]], particularly item 4 under General criteria. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please feel free to use [[WP:DRV|deletion review]], but do not continue to repost the article if it is deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we request you to follow these instructions.{{{3|}}} <!-- Template: Uw-repost --> [[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 04:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


Dear colleague can you help me writng this letter : B with the sign ~ on it??
(which is pronounced B-Tilda, in french?) I do have a lot of problems learning writing style.
Thank you for help and understanding. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Mmbmmmbm|Mmbmmmbm]] ([[User talk:Mmbmmmbm|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Mmbmmmbm|contribs]]) 13:30, 7 December 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

You are close. [[Jo%C3%A3o Pessoa]] is not far from [[Recife]].

Are you at UMN Stats?

Btw, I wasn't able to find your email with Google. Mine is at http://optimizelife.com/.

[[User:Guslacerda|Guslacerda]] ([[User talk:Guslacerda|talk]]) 20:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC);

==Ring==
Response at my talk page. [[User:Jeepday|Jeepday]] <small>([[User talk:Jeepday|talk]])</small> 23:12, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

==School of Statistics==
Hello, Michael Hardy. I have not seen the talk page yet for [[Leonid Hurwicz]] but I did receive your message on my talk page. Thank you. I believe that school was renamed later. -[[User:Susanlesch|Susanlesch]] ([[User talk:Susanlesch|talk]]) 20:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

== Kleene ==

The article on [[Stephen Cole Kleene]] already gives the pronunciations of his name. I dislike the redundancy of including it in every article that mentions him; I don't want to see it added to [[Kleene's T predicate]], [[Kleene's recursion theorem]], and so on. Also, the claim in the Kleene algebra article is somewhat misleading. Although ''Kleene'' may have pronounced his name with a [[diphthong]] in the first syllable, a common pronunciation among U.S. logicians does not have one. (Similarly, many well-educated mathematicians pronounce Goedel with an r at the end of the first syllable.) This could be covered in some depth in the biography, if there is a source anywhere about it. Interestingly, you were worried about the fact that someone might misread it as 'clean', while I was concerned for the feelings of people who pronounce it like 'cleany'. Can we compromise on "two syllables" in the algebra article? &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 01:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

: No on suggested putting it in every article that mentions him. In this article his name is actually part of the name of the article and the thing that the article is about. It is a case in which incorrect surmises about the pronunciation of the article's title are very very probable. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 05:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

::Looking at [[Special:PrefixIndex/Kleene]], and ignoring the redirects (italicized), there are at least seven article names starting in Kleene and referring to S.C.K. How many of those should have a pronunciation guide for his name? I don't think any of the computability-oriented ones have it. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 14:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

== Liquid state machines ==

Hi Michael,

I see that you have added a dash to Liquid state machines. Again. Do you have a source in the field that states that that is how it is spelled? Otherwise I would request you to revert it back please, like before, which is the usage in the field.

Thanks
-Kaushik <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Kghose|Kghose]] ([[User talk:Kghose|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kghose|contribs]]) 18:41, 12 December 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: Hi Michael,
I've changed it back.
Thanks
-Kaushik <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Kghose|Kghose]] ([[User talk:Kghose|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kghose|contribs]]) 15:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== An Archimedes puzzler ==

Hi. I seem to recall that you have been active in editing some Archimedes related articles. In this vein, could you look at [[Talk:Ostomachion]] to see if you can shed some light on the question I pose there? -- [[User:Cimon Avaro|Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick.]] ([[User talk:Cimon Avaro|talk]]) 12:12, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

== Abraham Ezechiel Plessner ==

Hello Michael Hardy. I am happy to know that you are a mathematicians. I have created the biography of [[Abraham Ezechiel Plessner]]. Please see the biography and add information if you can. Regards, [[User:Masterpiece2000|Masterpiece2000]] ([[User talk:Masterpiece2000|talk]]) 04:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

== Personal attack cautions ==

{{{icon|[[Image:Information.svg|25px]] }}}{{{{{subst|}}}#if:wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Totient function/Proofs|With regard to your comments on [[:wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Totient function/Proofs]]:&#32;}}Please see Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|no personal attacks]] policy. Comment on ''content'', not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocks]] for disruption. Please [[Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot|stay cool]] and keep this in mind while editing. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:uw-npa2 --> [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Totient_function/Proofs&diff=next&oldid=178033699 This] is not acceptable. I suggest an apology. [[User:TableManners|TableManners]] ([[User talk:TableManners|talk]]) 07:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ra2007&diff=next&oldid=178033176 This] is also disconcerting. [[User:TableManners|TableManners]] ([[User talk:TableManners|talk]]) 08:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Look: I do not insert information into Wikipedia articles on how to do open heart surgery because I don't know anything about that. If I were to do so, and someone who ''does'' know that subject were to respond to my content by saying "You're crazy. You're a lunatic.", I don't think that would really be a violation of Wikipedia's policy against personal attacks. That's what's going on here. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 17:31, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

:Sorry to butt-in. I would just like to say that when users pretend to have mathematical expertise, when they really do not, then they are using bad etiquette, if not being downright deceptive. At the very least, there is an implicit insult when someone steals the glory of a true mathematician in this context. Just my opinion. I say, you were justified. Your point was right-on, suggesting humility on technical matters where one has no expertise. [[User:Tparameter|Tparameter]] ([[User talk:Tparameter|talk]]) 01:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

: Your exchange in the relevant discussion on whether the totient proofs should be deleted or not were contrary to the notion of an open exchange of ideas. You may find the ideas repulsive, but you need to confine your comments to the ideas, not the provenance of the ideas. That you failed to do. Based on your comments, the relevant individuals have every right to complain about your behavior, as do onlookers such as myself. From the [No personal attacks] page: ''As a matter of polite and effective discourse, comments should not be personalized and should be directed at content and actions rather than people''.[[User:Beetle B.|Beetle B.]] ([[User talk:Beetle B.|talk]]) 08:25, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I said that certain users were abusive. So far, the best objection I've seen to what I said was from [[user:r.e.b.]] who proposed that perhaps those users were simply stupid. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 14:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

== [[Coupon collector's problem]] ==
Hi Mike, I was teaching this and my students complained that couldn't read about it anywhere. Take a look. [[User:Igorpak|Igorpak]] ([[User talk:Igorpak|talk]]) 21:12, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for your help with the page! I don't know enough conventions - it took me a long time to make it as good as it was... [[User:Igorpak|Igorpak]] ([[User talk:Igorpak|talk]]) 21:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

== C. P. Ramanujam ==

[[C P Ramanujam]] needs to be moved to [[C. P. Ramanujam]], but this seems to need admin tools to do while keeping its history, as the latter article already exists as a stub. (I think the stub can be quietly deleted; I wrote most of it anyway.)

I notice from some of the comments above that you have been forgetting to apply [[Hanlon's razor]] again... [[User:R.e.b.|R.e.b.]] ([[User talk:R.e.b.|talk]]) 05:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

== Wikiquette Alert regarding your behavior at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Totient function/Proofs]] ==

Per instructions at [[Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts|Wikiquette Alerts]], this message is to inform you that you are the subject of such an alert. More information may be found [[Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#Michael%20Hardy|here]]. [[User:Ra2007|Ra2007]] ([[User talk:Ra2007|talk]]) 19:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
:I just moved to close the Wikiquette alert. It's not getting anywhere, and it is appearing more and more to be a tempest in a teapot. [[User:Ra2007|Ra2007]] ([[User talk:Ra2007|talk]]) 20:02, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

== Your comments on my talk page ==

I appreciate you taking the time to write a note on my talk page and I appreciate the candor with which you make your argument. I am relatively new to Wikipedia and therefore am not yet fully acclimated to the written and unwritten rules governing this little corner of the web. However, [[WP:BOLD|being bold]] was my only intention in commenting on that particular AfD discussion, and I apologize if my opinion caused you any distress. You seem to be an intelligent and educated person from your writing, but I take exception to some of the comments you made about me on the AfD nomination page and your own talk page. While you may feel strongly about a certain article or subject manner, I would appreciate it if you do not accuse me of acting in bad faith or being stupid. Such statments constitute [[WP:PA|personal attacks]] and I will not abide them. Thank you again for posting a comment on my talk page, I sincerely hope our future dealings are under more civil circumstances. Cheers. --'''<span style="font-family: Helvetica">[[User:SimpleParadox|<font color="black">Simple</font>]][[User talk:SimpleParadox|<font color="Grey">Paradox</font>]]</span>''' 17:25, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

==[[List of United States business school rankings]]==
FYI: Your additions to the subject article are under discussion (for deletion) at [[Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of United States business school rankings]]. --[[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 18:18, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

== Weird misuse of TeX in ''Abstract family of acceptors''. ==

Compare <math>(\Gamma, I, f, g)</math> to (<math>\Gamma</math>, <math>I</math>, <math>f</math>, <math>g</math>). Both are legitimate uses of TeX. Which is more readable? In the browsers I checked (Safari and Firefox on Mac, Safari and IE on Windows), it is the latter, i.e. the one you say contains "a weird misuse of Tex". I prefer not to have the commas jammed against the next symbol making it more difficult for my old eyes. The formatting instructions for the former may be simpler, but I always err on the side of legibility when publishing a paper. I assumed legibility was important on the web and Wikipedia also. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Vantelimus|Vantelimus]] ([[User talk:Vantelimus|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Vantelimus|contribs]]) 13:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: They certainly do not look jammed against anything in TeX on the browsers I've looked at them with: both Firefox on Windows and Seamonkey (formerly Mozilla) on Linux. But the latter version looks badly misaligned---some character higher and others lower---and the two bounding parentheses that are not in TeX look jammed against the two adjacent characters. I am the foremost champion of legibility on Wikipedia and possibly the only Wikipedia in whose edit history you will frequently find the word ''legibility'' in edit summaries; in many cases that word has been my whole edit summary. When people write the ordered pair (''a'',''b''), I often change it to (''a'',&nbsp;''b'') both for the sake of legibility and for the sake of making non-TeX mathematical notation match TeX style as closely as possible. Generally I prefer to avoid "inline" TeX on Wikipedia because on the browsers I've used, inline TeX often looks far bigger than the surrounding letters and often gets placed too high or too low rather than properly centered. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 17:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

::Very strange. I'll look at them Firefox on Windows and on a Linux box [[User:Vantelimus|Vantelimus]] ([[User talk:Vantelimus|talk]]) <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|comment]] was added at 20:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==AfD nomination of [[Quiche-eater]]==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|left|48px|]]An editor has nominated [[Quiche-eater]], an article on which you have worked or that you created, for [[Wikipedia:Deletion process|deletion]]. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "[[WP:NOT|What Wikipedia is not]]").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at {{#if:Quiche-eater | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quiche-eater]] | [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quiche-eater]] }} and please be sure to [[WP:SIG|sign your comments]] with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the [[WP:AfD|articles for deletion]] template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you.<!-- Template:AFDNote --> [[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 22:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

== The [[Szász-Mirakyan operators]] page ==

With respect to the [[Szász-Mirakyan operators]] page, do you know who Mirakyan is?
<span style="font: 13pt 'Arial';">«</span> '''[[:User:dtrebbien|D Trebbien]] ([[:User_talk:dtrebbien|<span style="color: #000;">talk</span>]])''' 00:37 [[2008]] [[January 2]] (UTC)
: Sorry---no. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 02:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

It looks like an Armenian last name, if that helps. -[[User:Ben pcc|Ben pcc]] ([[User talk:Ben pcc|talk]]) 03:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

==[[:Holocube]]==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important yellow.svg|left|48px|]]
Another editor has added the "{{tl|prod}}" template to the article [[Holocube]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]] and [[Wikipedia:Notability]]). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at [[Talk:Holocube|its talk page]]. If you remove the {{tl|prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion]], where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. <!-- Template:PRODNote --> [[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 14:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


==Image copyright problem with Image:2004-07-31 Nena at the opening of the Berliner Olympiastadion.jpg==

[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|32px|left|Image Copyright problem]]
Thank you for uploading [[:Image:2004-07-31 Nena at the opening of the Berliner Olympiastadion.jpg]]. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes [[Wikipedia:Copyrights|copyright]] very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the '''license''' and the '''source''' of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a '''[[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags|copyright tag]]''' to the [[Help:Image page|image description page]].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|media copyright questions page]]. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. [[User:STBotI|STBotI]] ([[User talk:STBotI|talk]]) 02:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

== Punctuation inside &lt;math&gt; tags ==

Hi Michael,

I have been noticing how you have been moving punctuation inside <code>&lt;math&gt;</code> tags, presumably because the LaTeX rendering of the commas and periods are better typeset. In this regard, I agree completely that the default look of commas and periods is too small and awkward next to math images. However, the reason why I don't move punctuation inside is that I feel that math tags should only contain mathematics. Also, I can edit my [[User:Dtrebbien/monobook.css|monobook.css user page]] to make the text font different.

Everyone can alter the styles that they see by adding [[Cascading Style Sheets]] to their monobook.css user page, so everyone has more control over how things render on their screen (while logged in) when the punctuation is text.
<span style="font: 13pt 'Arial';">«</span> '''[[:User:dtrebbien|D Trebbien]] ([[:User_talk:dtrebbien|<span style="color: #000;">talk</span>]])''' 07:27 [[2008]] [[January 6]] (UTC)

==Unspecified source for [[:Image:2004-07-31_Nena_at_the_opening_of_the_Berliner_Olympiastadion.jpg]]==


[[Image:Nuvola apps important blue.svg|70px|left]]
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:2004-07-31_Nena_at_the_opening_of_the_Berliner_Olympiastadion.jpg]]'''. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the [[copyright]] status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{Tl|GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the [[GFDL]]. If you believe the media meets the criteria at [[Wikipedia:Fair use]], use a tag such as {{tlp|non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use]]. See [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags]] for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [{{fullurl:Special:Log|type=upload&user=Michael_Hardy}} this link]. '''Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged''', as described on [[wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If the image is copyrighted under a [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Fair use|non-free license]] (per [[Wikipedia:Fair use]]) then '''the image will be deleted [[WP:CSD#I7|48 hours]] after 15:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)'''. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Image source --> [[User:Mecu|<font color="CEBE70">'''MECU'''</font>]]≈<small>[[User talk:Mecu|talk]]</small> 15:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

----

== The Unfortunate 'Spelling' Article... ==


Thanks: I thought it was rather hilarious that there were spelling and punctuation errors in an article on spelling! [[User:Nct26|Nct26]] ([[User talk:Nct26|talk]]) 20:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC) By the way, is this how you 'talk' to people on Wikipedia: by editing their 'talk' page? I don't really know.

: That and the article discussion pages. And discussion pages that accompany WikiProjects and the like. It seems virtually that the hilarious nature of the "Spelleng" was intended by the anonymous user who did it. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 22:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

== Your opinion ==

Hi Michael,
If you could spare a bit of your time, I would really value your opinion on an RfC I have opened concerning the page [[info-gap decision theory]]. There is a new user there who has published a paper saying info-gap is totally wrong. He agrees that his interpretation is a minority view but wants the info-gap article to endorse it all the same. Right now the article is really messed up because of this and he won't agree to what seems to me a fair compromise. I would really appreciate an outsider's view on this topic. Thanks! --[[User:Zvika|Zvika]] ([[User talk:Zvika|talk]]) 11:16, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

== Pinsky phenomenon ==

There might be a slight error here. Instead of < there should be <= . See Pinsky's book, around p. 142+ about this. Maybe you can correct. Wikipedians editors do not like me and call me names. Maybe you can help instead of me. [[User:AmeliaElizabeth|AmeliaElizabeth]] ([[User talk:AmeliaElizabeth|talk]]) 12:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

==Can you help me? ==

I wrote this to an editor who keeps harassing me. Can you help me?

'''why do you not like me? why are you so mean? why do you make me sad?

I mean no harm. I love numbers. Gauss proved all numbers interesting. Why are you mean to me? Why you make me sad? I am new here. I thought people are supposed to be nice. why not nice? please explain. [[User:AmeliaElizabeth|AmeliaElizabeth]] ([[User talk:AmeliaElizabeth|talk]]) 12:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
[[User:AmeliaElizabeth|AmeliaElizabeth]] ([[User talk:AmeliaElizabeth|talk]]) 12:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)'' [[User:AmeliaElizabeth|AmeliaElizabeth]] ([[User talk:AmeliaElizabeth|talk]]) 12:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

== Inline TeX Clarification ==

Hey.

Sorry to bring this back to life, but I just noticed the following (pretty old) edit summary in [[Chebyshev polynomials]]:

:''Got rid of some hideous inline TeX. I'm inclined to suspect that it looks just as hideous on the browser of those who do this stuff as on anyones, but that those people just don't mind hideousnes.''

I really don't see what's so hideous. Here is a screenshot of what I see, old and new edits: [http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~ben_s/Temp/TeX_in_ChebyshevPolynomials.png]

I'm a student, so I often use (and contribute with) shared computers. I've never seen anything but what you see in the screenshot, not on any machine. The manual of style for math doesn't recommend one over the other, as long as the inline math does not get rendered as an image. Neither edit shows images, ever.

I want to emphasize that I '''really''' don't care because they're equivalent as far as I see, but I'm letting you know so that if something isn't right in your user preferences, you wouldn't have to spend any effort fixing my edits; also Wikipedia in general would look nicer as my edits are not the only ones with non-image TeX.

Sorry for bringing up this annoying topic, &mdash; [[User:Ben pcc|Ben pcc]] ([[User talk:Ben pcc|talk]]) 00:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

: Your screen shot doesn't look hideous, but on several different browsers I've used, characters in [[TeX]] look far bigger than the surrounding text and are often not aligned with it, being either too high or too low. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 16:06, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

::Still true if you're logged out? Just curious. -[[User:Ben pcc|Ben pcc]] ([[User talk:Ben pcc|talk]]) 03:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

==Harry Binswanger Image==
The discussion is [[Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2008_January_13#Image:Hb0516.jpg|here]]. -[[User:Nv8200p|Nv8200p]] [[User_talk:Nv8200p|talk]] 13:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
::Thank you. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 16:04, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

== By any chance... ==

...dou you live near Philadelphia? [[User:Editorofthewiki|Editorofthewiki]] ([[User talk:Editorofthewiki|talk]]) 01:17, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

: No---for the Time Being I live in Minneapolis. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 01:45, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

== On "that" and "which" ==

You replaced my "which" by "that" in [[C-minimal theory]], citing the article [[restrictive clause]]. A more exact pointer would have been [[English relative clauses#That and which]], where it is noted that this is a frequent point of dispute. I would suggest being a bit more careful in this area, as most of us (me not excepted as you can see) have stronger feelings on such trivial little things than seems rational.

I consider "which" to be slightly better style in this case than "that", although here the difference is so small that I don't care enough to revert. In every restrictive relative clause that I write I make a choice between "that" and "which". I don't agree at all with Fowler or his followers, and I believe that my point of view is shared by many professional linguists even in the US. (In the previous sentence "which I write" would have sounded awkward, and more so than "that" usually does in cases where it's the other way round. I suspect that that's where Fowler's recommendation came from: He wanted a simple rule. But I don't want to follow simplified rules in cases where I have a feeling for the more complicated original rule.) Also, although I try to stick to Oxford style "ize" spellings for the Wikipedia articles I start, I generally write British English, where Fowler's rule definitely doesn't apply. I would generally recommend against this kind of "corrections" at all, but at least you could check for clear indicators that the article was started in American English before changing BE to AE. --[[User:Hans Adler|Hans Adler]] ([[User talk:Hans Adler|talk]]) 17:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

==Vague topology==
:It's really inappropriate to begin a Wikipedia article by saying
:Let X be a locally compact Hausdorff space
:just as if you could assume the reader is a mathematician. You need to give
:some initial context-setting first, informing the reader that mathematics is what the article is to be about.

A simple "Please provide some more context for the article" would be nice. I find the tone to be a bit scolding an uncivil, which hardly seems to be called for. I had started the article late one night, and never got around to finishing off the stub context. If you still find the article inappropriate, I can place a prod tag on it, and we can forget the whole thing. [[User:Silly rabbit|Silly rabbit]] ([[User talk:Silly rabbit|talk]]) 22:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

== your puzzle ==

Of course to anyone with typographical training there's a huge difference between <math>+a+b+c</math> etc. (where "+" is a "unary operator") and <math>{}+a+b+c</math> (a part of a multi-line formula, for example) where "+" is a binary operator. Just adding "{}" in front of "+" will tell TeX to make that operator into a binary operator. The difference in the spacing is instantly obvious to a trained eye! :: [[Special:Contributions/131.111.8.102|131.111.8.102]] ([[User talk:131.111.8.102|talk]]) 02:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
* PS haven't looked at your code, of course; I'm just using this sort of thing every day in my own work! Feel free to delete these comments so as not to give clues to future visitors of your page :) :: [[Special:Contributions/131.111.8.102|131.111.8.102]] ([[User talk:131.111.8.102|talk]]) 02:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

== Rosin Rammler distribution ==

I think a few people editing this article are misunderstanding an important point. Take a look at [[talk:Rosin Rammler distribution]] and see if what I am saying makes sense. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Noodle snacks|Noodle snacks]] ([[User talk:Noodle snacks|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Noodle snacks|contribs]]) 03:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Grip (tennis) ==

I don't get it, what did I do? I followed the link you gave me but I can't view it because i'm not an admin. [[User:Milaneus|мιІапэџѕ]] ([[User talk:Milaneus|talk]]) 03:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

: I don't think you need to be an administrator to read that. It says you moved "grip&nbsp;(tennis)" (with a lower-case initial "t" to "grip&nbsp;(Tennis)" (with a capital "T"). [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 06:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

== standard deviation ==

Sorry about that Michael, thanks for your message. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Shadowolfe|Shadowolfe]] ([[User talk:Shadowolfe|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Shadowolfe|contribs]]) 19:11, 13 February 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==[[:Nucular]]==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important yellow.svg|left|48px|]]
Another editor has added the <code>{{tl|prod}}</code> template to the article [[Nucular]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]] and [[Wikipedia:Notability]]). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at [[Talk:Nucular|its talk page]]. If you remove the <code>{{tl|prod}}</code> template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion]], where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. <!-- Template:PRODNote --> [[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 17:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Dear Sir/Madam,

You are officially responsible for the creation of [[nucular|the single worst article on Wikipedia]]. This kind of article is why people don't take it seriously. You've made a joke of what could have been--indeed, should have been--a great institution of knowledge. Instead, you have turned it into yet another bad joke on the internet.

Respectfully,<br>A Concerned Netizen. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/132.206.3.148|132.206.3.148]] ([[User talk:132.206.3.148|talk]]) 19:26, 9 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

==[[:Allende's Last Radio Boadcast Message]]==
A tag has been placed on [[:Allende's Last Radio Boadcast Message]], requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the [[WP:CSD#Redirects|criteria for speedy deletion]], because it is a redirect from an implausible typo.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you believe that there is a reason to keep the redirect, you can request that [[Wikipedia:Administrators|administrators]] wait a while before deleting it. To do this, affix the template '''<code>{{tl|hangon}}</code>''' to the page and state your intention on the article's [[Help:Talk page|talk page]]. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.<!-- Template:Redirnone-warn --> -- [[User:MisterHand|<span style="color: #0000ff">'''MisterHand'''</span>]] <small>([[User talk:MisterHand|Talk to the Hand]]|[[Special:Contributions/MisterHand|Contribs]])</small> 17:49, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

== statistics WikiProject ==

Great idea; I would participate with probability 1. [[User:Btyner|Btyner]] ([[User talk:Btyner|talk]]) 23:24, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
:I'm almost sure I would too. <strike>Statistics is a mathematical science, not a branch of mathematics, after all.</strike> I've occasionally thought of starting some discussion on the talk page for [[WP:WikiProject Mathematics/Wikipedia 1.0/Probability and statistics]] but i'm not sure anyone would notice. It took me several weeks to find that project page and i suspect no-one [[help:watch|watch]]es it. --[[User:Qwfp|Qwfp]] ([[User talk:Qwfp|talk]]) 23:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
::Changed my mind. Just found out about [[WP:TASKFORCE|task force]]s and now think a statistics task force sounds more appropriate. Or maybe a probability and statistics taskforce would be better, as that would fit in with the existing structure of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Wikipedia 1.0]]. Any thoughts? [[User:Qwfp|Qwfp]] ([[User talk:Qwfp|talk]]) 14:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

== Sections: Casuarina Tree ==

Hi Michael Hardy, <s>just a wikistyle thing – apologies if it's not you – it looks like there's some misunderstanding about the sections in the article [[The Casuarina Tree]], they are titles of short stories so need to keep their caps, but they aren't the main title of the book, so they aren't in italics. I noticed no-one has given you a reason which would help I guess, so this is the reason. Hope it helps, cheers [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 02:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
</s> My bad, I see you caught on. [[User:Julia Rossi|Julia Rossi]] ([[User talk:Julia Rossi|talk]]) 02:38, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

== [[Webster Theater]] ==

Hi, thank you for your input on the [[Webster Theater]] article., its much appreciated. -<b><font color="#313">kevin</font></b> <sup><font color="#002BB8">[[User talk:Kevinebaugh|talk]]</font></sup><sub>[mailto:kevinebaugh@gmail.com email]</sub><small> <font color="#313131"></font></small> 02:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

== typography for internal links ==

Michael, thanks for several recent improvements. Looking at my Watchlist today, I feel I'm probably missing something, but alls well that edits well. I just want to note why I use <nowiki>[[Foo_bar|foo bar]]</nowiki> instead of <nowiki>[[foo bar]]</nowiki>: the former preserves the actual name of the item in the database underlying the wiki, as the first term, and makes the human-presentation explicitly distinct. The latter form requires a wiki-aware parser, to convert "foo bar" into "Foo_bar" before accessing the DB. I'm willing to sacrifice the few bytes in redundancy because first, it's not visible to the casual reader, second, it's pedagogical for people figuring out the system, and third, to aid automata. My habit is useless however as several editors just replace it exactly as you did, so I'll try to drop the habit. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] ([[User talk:PeterStJohn|talk]]) 18:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

== Confidence intervals ==

I saw your edit summary on [[Confidence interval]] that "It's been a while since I've looked at this; I may do some content edits later."

I hope you do; I think some recent edits (particularly [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Confidence_interval&diff=194652305&oldid=194409066 this one]) have made the article rather less clear, rather than more clear.

I'd also welcome your input on a dispute I'm in with some editors at [[Talk:Bayesian probability]] with my assertion that a confidence interval for a parameter θ "has ''nothing'' to do with getting a probability distribution for θ".

They claim on the contrary, that θ can be expected to fall in a 95% C.I. 95% of the time.

Particularly, I'd welcome any comments on [[Talk:Bayesian_probability#Arbitrary_section_break_.28Confidence_limits.29|this example]], which (if I've understood Confidence Intervals correctly) shows how one might be led to think that a parameter ''t'' had a 100% C.I. of {0 <= t <= 0}, when, if one calculated the Likelihood for ''t'', one would find it given by
:<math>L(t;x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2 \pi \mu t}}</math>
-- so an expectation value with a uniform prior would actually ''diverge''!

I ''think'' I've followed the rules properly, constructing an estimator, and then calculating a C.I. for the value it gives; but I'd welcome if you could have a look over it.

Thanks, [[User:Jheald|Jheald]] ([[User talk:Jheald|talk]]) 18:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

== Stub :) ==
Hmm, I tend to take things conservatively.... '''[[User:Blnguyen|<font color="GoldenRod">Blnguyen</font>]]''' (''[[User talk:Blnguyen#Straw_poll_for_selecting_photos_of_the_Indian_cricket_team_for_use_in_articles|<font color="#FA8605">vote in the photo straw poll</font>]]'') 03:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

== A Thoughtful Foundation ==

FWIW, your style standardization applied to [[Vector (physical)]] is a significant first step in the development of the article. --[[User:Firefly322|Firefly322]] ([[User talk:Firefly322|talk]]) 01:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

: Thank you---I appreciate having things like this noticed. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 03:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

== Watch your manners, Bub ==

RE: Bogus "copy edit"

Please don't use the phrase "copy edit" when you make a crucial change in the meaning of a sentence. That's what you did [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Move_navigational_lists_to_portal_namespace&diff=195665500&oldid=195661958 here]. [[list of mathematics articles]] and [[lists of mathematics topics]] are TWO DIFFERENT lists, of very different kinds. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 22:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

:I saw a red link and I fixed it. Watch you accusations when they have no basis in fact. I have no need for your insults. [[User:RichardF|RichardF]] ([[User talk:RichardF|talk]]) 23:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Wrong. It was not a red link. It was a working blue link. You changed it to a different working blue link in a way that drastically altered the meaning. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 23:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

== [[Lists of mathematics topics]] in portal namespace ==

I have replied to you on the talkpage of [[Wikipedia:Move navigational lists to portal namespace]]. -[[User:Halo|Halo]] ([[User talk:Halo|talk]]) 15:08, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

==Methodist Union==
You're welcome to do style edits. As a new-comer, I have a few things to remembr and get used to. AS you noted, in the case of the hymn book, it is commonly known as '''''The Methodist Hymn Book''''', or '''MHB''' for short when preachers are choosing hymns. The difficulty when writing about some subjects like Methodism when you have grown up in the Manse is that you are used to somethings being CAPITALISED - like the word ''Manse'', from the days when our address was "Wesley Manse, Village, etc." I have also asked someone in the Wesley Reform Union to take a look and comment on that section. Anyway, the thing about Wikipedia is that improving an article is a team effort. And I need help with sorting out my revised pictures in [[H B Kendall]] (I have a contact to ask about this). Best wishes [[User:Robert of Ramsor|Robert of Ramsor]] ([[User talk:Robert of Ramsor|talk]]) 21:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
And on reflection, to fit Wiki style it should be titled "Methodist union" not Methodist Union". I have got ued to lots of Capitals in the old books. I am happy for anyone to make this edit, and ad Redirects as required. [[User:Robert of Ramsor|Robert of Ramsor]] ([[User talk:Robert of Ramsor|talk]]) 17:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

== PowerBASIC ==

Hello Michael,

A user called "halo" recently deleted some content for the "PowerBASIC" entry in wikipedia. His comment was "who cares if they have a forum.
I would address this question to him directly but on his talk pages he says "Im leaving Wikipedia for at least a month... Im sick of it"

The answer is that thousands of users of the product depend upon the user support forums to get started and get help as they develop software. The user forums are more valauble to a new user than the product itself. After more than a decade with this product I am very familiar with this. New users need to be aware of what they are getting into should they be counting upon the forums when purchasing the product despite the companies attempts to sanitize their track record.

I am not sure how the moderator structure works at wikipedia, but I would like to find out and make sure that my edits meet your standards for truthfulness and accuracy. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:RealWorldExperience|RealWorldExperience]] ([[User talk:RealWorldExperience|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/RealWorldExperience|contribs]]) 01:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: There's not actually a "moderator". I haven't looked at the material that was deleted, but my first guess is that he may have thought it amounted to advertising, and that's normally considered a reason to delete material. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 01:14, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

== Redirects to non-existent pages ==

Hi, Mike. I saw your post at [[Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Redirects to non-existent pages]] and was going to suggest that it would be useful to find diffs, but I see you're already looking into that; and you've mentioned the approximate time period, which is also useful in itself. --[[User:Coppertwig|Coppertwig]] ([[User talk:Coppertwig|talk]]) 12:30, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

== Excuse me ==
Hi Mike. I posted a question about the use of "integration by parts" and "differentiation by parts" in the "Integration by Parts" article. Forget it. I posted the question in the wrong article. I removed it already.
Just to let you know, I was referring to the [[Smoothed_particle_hydrodynamics]] article. The question was correctly posted there now.
Thank you for your attention, and excuse me for the mess.
[ ]s
[[User:Capagot|Capagot]] ([[User talk:Capagot|talk]]) 22:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

== Bernoulli numbers, Carlitz identity ==
Hi Michael. Could you please let me know a reference for the identity of Carlitz appearing on the Wikipedia page "Bernoulli number" in the Assorted Identities section? I see it has been entered by you on 21/9/2006, and I couldn't find a reference to the paper of Carlitz or to an article mentioning it. That would be extremely valuable. Thanks very much. Zephyr75 <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Zephyr75|Zephyr75]] ([[User talk:Zephyr75|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Zephyr75|contribs]]) 13:31, 7 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: Good question. I remember entering this, and now I'm wondering why I didn't say then where I found it. I'll see if I can find it. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 17:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

:: If you have trouble finding a reference let me know and I'll do what I can. I'm not on an academic campus where math libraries are handy, but they are nearby and I have friends. I knew Carlitz; my claim to fame is to have been the only freshman he ever had (in fifty years teaching) his Number Theory class :-) so I'm mindlessly loyal. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] ([[User talk:PeterStJohn|talk]]) 18:29, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
:: NB: there are 106 entries for Carlitz (as sole author) at [[http://www.mscs.dal.ca/~dilcher/bernc.html|this]] Bernoulli Numbers bibliography; that's like, a seventh of his total work. [[User:PeterStJohn|Pete St.John]] ([[User talk:PeterStJohn|talk]]) 18:38, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

== AfD: Jacqueline Eales ==
I was reading over your comment left under my delete recommendation, and have to say that you were being pretty rude. Comment on the subject at hand, not the commenter. Thank you.
<b><font color="Indigo">[[User:Queerbubbles|Queerbubbles]]</font> | <font color="MidnightBlue">[[User talk:Queerbubbles|Leave me Some Love]]</font></b> 10:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

: I guess people are touchy about English usage. I do wonder why I keep seeing that one lately. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 13:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
:: I'm not touchy about grammer... I'm touchy about personal attacks and you implying that I am not educated. Thanks. <b><font color="Indigo">[[User:Queerbubbles|Queerbubbles]]</font> | <font color="MidnightBlue">[[User talk:Queerbubbles|Leave me Some Love]]</font></b> 18:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
: I neither said nor thought you were uneducated. I was and am puzzled about why that strange locution has started turning up repeatedly and that is what I said. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 20:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

== Experimental design ==

Maybe you go back farther than me (though that is hard to believe)! The only books I could dig up at the moment are:

*'''Quasi-Experimentation Design & Analysis Issues for Field Settings''' (1979) by Thomas Cook and Donald Campbell

*'''Statistical Principles in Experimental Design''' (2nd Ed.) (1971) by B. J. Winer

*'''Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research''' (1973) by Donald Compbell and Julian Stanley

*'''Experimental Principles and Design in Psychology''' (1970) Herbert Kimmel

I remember the name Fisher and thought I had a book by him, but my books are in chaos right now. Anyway, what's in a name? Regards, [[User:Mattisse|<font color="007FFF">'''Mattisse'''</font>]] ([[User talk:Mattisse|Talk]]) 01:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

:: Well, searching Google Books for those with the title "Design of Experiments" immediately brings up more than a thousand books, the first of which is Fisher's 1935 book that started the whole thing. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 03:22, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

== Thanks for Pointing Out my Error ==

I have replied at [[User Talk:Random89|my talk page]]<font color="#3B9C9C">[[User:Random89|Random]]</font><font color="#F87217">[[User Talk:Random89|89]]</font> 05:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

== Golden ratio symbol changes ==

{{User|168.103.222.216}} is persistent. This anon continues to change the notation in the [[Golden ratio]] article even after your revert and mine. Is there anything you can do? If he or she persists, I will continue to revert. I am concerned about [[WP:3RR]], although I believe my actions would be a permissible exception. [[User:Finell|Finell]] [[User_talk:Finell|(Talk)]] 21:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC) <b><small>''(To preserve the continuity of the conversation, I will watch for your reply <u>here</u> on <u>your</u> Talk page.)''</small></b>

== Deletionists ==
I was reading about your ordeal with the deletionist crowd. I've had the unfortunately experience of having my first two articles CSD-A7. You can find a "discussion" of their handywork at [[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tefosav]] and on my talk page [[User_talk:Zenasprime]]. The system is broken at it's core. I'd like to see it get fixed but I doubt it can be done considering the current climate. Good Luck friend. ;) [[User:Zenasprime|Zenasprime]] ([[User talk:Zenasprime|talk]]) 00:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
:http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/5889/wikipediakidnappeddm3.png [[User:Z00r|Z00r]] ([[User talk:Z00r|talk]]) 08:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

== Sum(s) of Random Variables (Central Limit Theorem) ==
It is still important that the CLT will not work if there is zero variance (I think). If the population contains 1 value, any sample
will return N of that value, All the sums will be the same and their distribution will not be normal, it will just be a
spike. Or is this ok because a normal distribution with zero variance is still normal, formally speaking? It
isn't normal in the ordinary sense... I note the "classical version" in the CLT article does require <math>\sigma^2>0</math>.

Take care.

[[User:Tombadog|Tombadog]] ([[User talk:Tombadog|talk]]) 11:52, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

: I don't have any major problem with a normal distribution of variance 0. As &sigma; approaches 0, the normal distribution of variance &sigma; converges in distribution to a degenerate distribution of variance 0. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 12:36, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Question:

Almost every discussion of the CLT talks about rolling dice and coin flipping which I find
very easy to grasp. Let me see if I have this straight, using dice as the example. The first
roll of the die, X(1) is 2. I am thinking the "random variable" at issue here is the value
X takes on in any roll. You only need one random variable to sample from, right? And
as everyone knows the possibilities for a single die are uniformly distributed, so X itself
is not normal.

We create a sample of, say, 10 rolls and we add them up, getting 38 as the result.
This is what a "sum of a random variable" seems to mean. I may be wrong.

We have one measely sum, so there is no distribution for the sum as yet.

We go on to create 100 sums of 10 rolls each. We plot the frequency with which we encounter
particular sums and viola: it's normal. So we have in hand an example where the sums of a uniformly
distributed random variable are normally distributed. Now that's the way I'd put it, an artifact of the
way I see the process working.

The CLT text says something a bit different to me. It refers to "the sum of independent identically distributed random variables".

In the case of Moivre or the die roll, exactly what are the variables? I see just one, but many sums thereof..

Thanks much,

[[User:Tombadog|Tombadog]] ([[User talk:Tombadog|talk]]) 15:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

: You wrote:
:
:: We have one measely sum, so there is no distribution for the sum as yet.
:
: But you could have said the same thing about rolling the die ONCE. We just get one number, so there is no distribution yet. But instead you say it's uniformly distributed. Now imagine throwing the die, not just one time, and not yet ten, but rather twice. Here's what you get:
:
:: <math>
\begin{array}{c|rrrrrr}
& 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 \\ \hline
1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 \\
2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 \\
3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 \\
4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 \\
5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 \\
6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12
\end{array}
</math>
:
: Now the number 2 appears only once out of 36 possible outcomes, and so does 12, so we have
:
:: <math> \Pr(\text{sum} = 2) = 1/36 = \Pr(\text{sum} = 12). </math>
:
: And 3 appears twice, and so does 11, so we have
:
:: <math> \Pr(\text{sum} = 3) = 2/36 = \Pr(\text{sum} = 11). </math>
:
: And so on:
:
:: <math> \Pr(\text{sum} = 4) = 4/36 = \Pr(\text{sum} = 9), </math>
:
:: <math> \Pr(\text{sum} = 5) = 5/36 = \Pr(\text{sum} = 8), </math>
:
:: <math> \Pr(\text{sum} = 7) = 6/36. </math>
:
: And we get a non-uniform distribution with a peak in the middle, thus a ''little'' bit closer to the normal distribution. If you throw three dice and take the sum of the three numbers, the possible outcomes are 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and the probabilities are:
:
:: <math>
\begin{array}{rcccl}
\Pr(\text{sum} = 3) & = & 1/216 & = & \Pr(\text{sum} = 18) \\
\Pr(\text{sum} = 4) & = & 3/216 & = & \Pr(\text{sum} = 17) \\
\Pr(\text{sum} = 5) & = & 6/216 & = & \Pr(\text{sum} = 16) \\
\Pr(\text{sum} = 6) & = & 10/216 & = & \Pr(\text{sum} = 15) \\
\Pr(\text{sum} = 7) & = & 15/216 & = & \Pr(\text{sum} = 14) \\
\Pr(\text{sum} = 8) & = & 21/216 & = & \Pr(\text{sum} = 13) \\
\Pr(\text{sum} = 9) & = & 25/216 & = & \Pr(\text{sum} = 12) \\
\Pr(\text{sum} = 10) & = & 27/216 & = & \Pr(\text{sum} = 11) \\
\end{array}
</math>
: (You should check my arithmetic.) So we have a sum of three random variables, and it has this probability distribution. And notice that as you move from the right edge leftward, it gets steeper, then near the middle it gets less steep. So this is still closer to being normal. For a sum of 10 throws of the dice one similarly gets a probability distribution, this one quite close to normal. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 19:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks --

I think you have answered my fundamental question which was "what do people mean when they talk about random variables in the plural?" I would
prevoiusly guessed the would be the sort of thing one would give a different letter name to in algebra, as opposed to an index number to in a list
of different intantiations of the same entity in a list. You know x is age and y is weight. X is a set of ages, X(1) the first age. But above you talk about
tossing three dice as the sum of three random variables. I would have thought theres was only 1.

[[User:Tombadog|Tombadog]] ([[User talk:Tombadog|talk]]) 16:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

: The '''sum''' of '''three''' random variables is '''one''' random variable. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 16:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

==Eternity==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important yellow.svg|left|48px|]]
Another editor has added the <code>{{tl|prod}}</code> template to the article [[Eternity]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also [[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not]] and [[Wikipedia:Notability]]). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at [[Talk:Eternity|its talk page]]. If you remove the <code>{{tl|prod}}</code> template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion]], where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. <!-- Template:PRODNote --> [[User:BJBot|BJBot]] ([[User talk:BJBot|talk]]) 15:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

==Categorical bridge==
Hi Michael, I noticed that you edited the article on Categorical Bridge. Do you know about this stuff? I'm trying to figure out whether it is really worthy of an article. As far as I can tell, it stems from an unpublished and uncited draft manuscript. If it's not worthy of an article, maybe it should be deleted sooner rather than later, before anyone invests too much time in it. Not sure. [[User:Sam Staton|Sam Staton]] ([[User talk:Sam Staton|talk]]) 18:13, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

: I don't know the material; I just knew that the lack of context-setting was inappropriate, and I edited accordingly. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 19:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

:: Thanks. I've added the "unencyclopedic" template for the time being. [[User:Sam Staton|Sam Staton]] ([[User talk:Sam Staton|talk]]) 21:30, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


== removed cis(x) discussion from the list of trigonometric identities ==

Hi Michael,
After some infrequent comments on the discussion page, I deleted the entire section on cis from [[List_of_trigonometric_identities]]. I know you put some effort into it, but I think an identities page is the wrong place for it. If you can find a better place, I'd encourage you to add it back. Sorry, [[User:Derekt75|Derekt75]] ([[User talk:Derekt75|talk]]) 22:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


==[[Solar variation]]==
You wrote:
<blockquote>[[Solar variation]] is about variations in energy that the sun emits. It has '''nothing''' to do with seasons on '''EARTH''', or anything about the earth at all.</blockquote>
Please try the following:
#Go to [[Solar variation]]
#Open a page-search window of your Web browser. Usually CTRL-F does the trick.
#Enter the search term "earth". Check if case sensitive is off.
#Search.
#Repeat step 4 until you have progressed to the end of the article, counting how many times you find the search term.
[[User:Dysmorodrepanis|Dysmorodrepanis]] ([[User talk:Dysmorodrepanis|talk]]) 03:16, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

::You make no sense. Yes, solar variation affect the earth. I know that. I do not need to be convinced. But (1) solar variation would still exist if the earth did not, and (2) the topic of [[effect of sun angle on climate]] would still make just as much sense if there were not solar variation. There would still be seasons without solar variation and there would still be geographic variations in climate without solar variation. That is simply a separate topic from the topic of solar variation. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 03:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Fair enough, but to be about variation in energy output ''only'', the article is not limited enough; it throws ''all'' the sun's effects about merrily. I thus thought that ''contra'' the introduction, it ''was'' about the varying amount of solar irradiation emitted and received, ''regardless'' the cause of the variation.
:::Consequently there should be some revamping done. [[Effect of sun angle on climate]] should be tied in with [[Solar variation]] and [[Milankovitch cycles]], but in a different way as it is now (which suggests that it is a topic falling under the SV article's scope). I'd be glad to be able to keep my hands off that.
:::[[Effect of sun angle on climate]] is also in need of sourcing, which is another reason I porposed the merge. [[User:Dysmorodrepanis|Dysmorodrepanis]] ([[User talk:Dysmorodrepanis|talk]]) 03:55, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

== WPstatistics ==

Hi Michael, I notice you've been adding <nowiki>{{WPStatistics}}</nowiki> to lots of articles. Are you doing this manually? There are much easier ways, e.g. [[WP:AWB]]. I would offer to do this for you through AWB, but to be honest, I am not sure that this serves any useful purpose. I never quite figured out what those talk page WikiProject notices were good for. Could you enlighten me? Thanks, --[[User:Zvika|Zvika]] ([[User talk:Zvika|talk]]) 19:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

== Happy First Day of Spring! ==

{{Template:First Day Of Spring}}

== Articles for deletion/Myrzakulov equations ==

*'''Keep''' Not a high-priority article, but legitimate. The assertion that Myrzakulov himself created this should be backed up with evidence. People who cite that reason in AfD nominations usually seem to get it wrong. Until evidence is given, the denial alone is sufficient to reject that particular proposed reason for deletion. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 00:32, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

:* As indicated in the article history page, it was originally created by G.N. Nugmanova. The references given are two joint papers by her, Myrzakulov, and two other authors. She has, in all, three published papers mentioned in the Scientific Citation Index, dated 1997, 1998 and 1999, all of which are jointly with Myrzakulov. She works at the same 'Institute of Physics and Technology', Almaty, Kazakhstan, and is evidently a junior colleague, probably a former student. There are six other preprints by her, posted at the ArXiv, [http://arxiv.org/find] of which two are jointly authored with Myrzakulov, and the third has his name in the title. The first of these, dating from 1994, while she was presumably a student, and probably remained unpublished, may be seen as a preprint posted at the ArXiv [http://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/9805070]. It looks much like a sketch of an early version this article, with the same coinages. Furthermore, the anonymous postings by the main contributors to this article, from IP addresses 89.218.75.26 89.218.78.249 89.218.75.26 89.218.76.146 92.46.70.181 89.218.68.182 89.218.78.59 92.46.69.25 92.46.69.209 89.218.68.194 89.218.75.34 89.218.76.21 89.218.75.34 89.218.75.34 89.218.78.218 89.218.75.101 212.154.189.114 89.218.75.222 89.218.75.157, as well as the one from 92.46.72.14 by the unsigned contributor to this page who claims to be the author, are all from the same location, in Alamaty, Kazakhstan, or from Astana, Kazakhstan, as may be verified by consulting the ip-address.com locator page [http://www.ip-adress.com/ipaddresstolocation/]. [[User:R physicist|R_Physicist]] ([[User talk:R physicist|talk]]) 12:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
* Yes, I'm the author of page [[Myrzakulov equations]]. To edit and to communication I used and continue use just one computer. Really I don't know why here arises many IP addresses. This is question for [[Kaztelecom]]. [[Ngn]] [[Special:Contributions/92.46.69.162|92.46.69.162]] ([[User talk:92.46.69.162|talk]]) 19:11, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
:::Don't worry about the many IP addresses. That's perfectly normal for people who use a telephone line for internet access, and nobody will try to draw any conclusions from that. I believe R Physicist's point was merely that the article was probably written by a single editor from Kazakhstan, and you have confirmed that anyway. By the way, welcome to Wikipedia, and sorry for the somewhat rough start. Unfortunately this happens frequently to people who begin here by writing on a subject that is really close to them. --[[User:Hans Adler|Hans Adler]] ([[User talk:Hans Adler|talk]]) 20:06, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

==Thank you==
I'm the author of the article [[Myrzakulov equations]] and I'm not the author of these equations. But I would like ask you to keep this my article. [[Ngn]] 92.46.65.69 (talk) 18:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

== Integrable systems ==

Hello. ( I guess this is a small interlude from the great "Deletion debate".)

I noticed that you moved the article "Integrable Systems" to "Integrable System",
just after I had done the converse. I am not sure why you did this, since the standard
usage, when referring to this area, is "Integrable Systems", since it is the
whole collection of them that is being referred to, and not one individual
example. If you are not sure about this, please just check the net for titles, e.g. of
books on the subject. (One is cited in the article itself.)
Writing it in the singular would be as inappropriate, say, as writing "Dynamic System"
instead of "Dynamic Systems" when referring to this area, or "Dynamic" when
referring to the are of mechanics usually called "Dynamics".

I will try to revert to the standard usage. [[User:R physicist|R_Physicist]] ([[User talk:R physicist|talk]]) 08:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

:*Please note that a site-wide convention to use singular forms is used, with only a few exceptions. The title refers to something particular, in other words it defines the concept of "integrable system". It doesn't refer to the research field as such. I hope that helps. [[User:Charles Matthews|Charles Matthews]] ([[User talk:Charles Matthews|talk]]) 09:23, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

:* Thanks - I see that there is some convention here, but do Wikipedia conventions override those of correct English usage (or the common practice of how a domain of research is called)? Since you are, I believe, mainly a statistician, let me make a comparison; what would a statistician think if the article on Bayesian Statistics were named "Bayesian Statistic"?
(In fact, I see the article has been, in this case, renamed "Bayesian inference", but the logic is exactly the same.) [[User:R physicist|R_Physicist]] ([[User talk:R physicist|talk]]) 14:18, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

==Weiner sausage==
Hi, sorry but I was not on Wikipedia (as I am not awake all 24 hours of the day and i'm located on the East Coast of America) when the changes were made and how it was speedy kept, yadda yadda. It's kinda funny that the only AfD comments that show up on my talk page are for the 2% that i voted too early on or without googling. Anyway, thanks for giving me heads up on the AfD. [[User:Doc Strange| Doc Strange]]<sup>[[User talk:Doc Strange|Mailbox Orbitting Black Hole]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/Doc Strange|Strange Frequencies]]</small> 15:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

== Derivation of the Routh array ==

Per your advice, I added some introductory lines before the math in [[Derivation of the Routh array]]. Thanks for dropping me the note. There has been quite a response to your posting in [[Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics#article needing attention|mathtalk]]. --[[User:Zaxxonal|Zaxxonal]] ([[User talk:Zaxxonal|talk]]) 23:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

== AGF much? ==

Please see a response on my talk page. -- <span style="background: #EECCFF;">[[User:SatyrTN|SatyrTN]] <small>([[User talk:SatyrTN|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/SatyrTN|contribs]])</small></span> 18:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

== [[Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship#Bite_the_newbies_and_get_rewarded_with_an_adminship]] ==

Michael, I am a little dispointed to find that you have started this thread at [[WT:RFA]], not only without leaving a note on my talk to advise that you felt my remarks warranted the thread, but also that you have only quoted part of my original comment and made no real attempt to provide further context to my remarks. Sorry, but I feel it would have been polite to advise me, if not initially certainly as the thread expanded. <small><span style="border:1px solid #0000ff;padding:1px;">[[User:Pedro|<b>Pedro</b>]] : [[User_talk:Pedro|<font style="color:#accC10;background:#0000fa;">&nbsp;Chat&nbsp;</font>]] </span></small> 21:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

==Aviasud Mistral==

Hey Michael, thanks for stepping in to this article and probably helping save it from the deletion bin. I've been corresponding with the author on his/her talk page, and it seems like we have a good faith editor on our hands. Do me a favor and watchlist this one; if someone noms it for deletion in a way you can't really refute, just userfy the article for me and I'll take care of it on the author's end. Thanks! Obviously, I'm open for questions/comments on this one. [[User:Tanthalas39|<font color="#CC7722" face="Papyrus">'''Tan'''</font>]] | [[User talk:Tanthalas39|<font color="#21421E" face="Papyrus">39</font>]] 00:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

==Mythology/Mitology==
Hello, I saw you had erroneously posted a message to my talk page, then deleted it, and being nosey I read it. However, I totally agree with what you wrote: I'm no expert and I don't have any real knowledge of religion, but it was absolutely obvious to me that context demanded that the intended word was "mythology". If I had thought the message was incomprehensible, I would have thought it was better to keep quiet and let others remain ignorant of my ignorance, rather than remove all doubt on this matter by announcing my incomprehension. I certainly wouldn't have taken such extreme action as deletion! [[User:ddstretch|<span style="border:1px solid DarkGreen;padding:1px;"><font style="color:White;background:DarkGreen" size="0">&nbsp;DDStretch&nbsp;</font></span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:ddstretch|<font color="DarkGreen" size = "0">(talk)</font>]] 00:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

== recent RVs ==

you just rved an anon editor over at [[Exponential family]], I'm not sure why you rved his edit that added in "or ''log-partition function''". Is there a reason? [[User:Pdbailey|Pdbailey]] ([[User talk:Pdbailey|talk]]) 01:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

:Thanks. [[User:Pdbailey|Pdbailey]] ([[User talk:Pdbailey|talk]]) 20:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

== Bochica & Bite the newbies and get rewarded with an adminship ==

* Could you explain why you labeled [[Bochica]] as "patent nonsense"? Thanks. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 17:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
* And please note that you're being talked about at [[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship]]. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 17:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

: I have read trough the [[Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship]] section, and i have to say: I am quite irritated that this edit, which is over a month old, somehow served as some kind of "Proof" for your statement. Even worse is the fact that you come to my user page, and somehow seem to claim that i violate [[WP:Bite]] on purpose to get some sort of good reputation if i even wanted to become an admin.

: Let me tell you, i'm offended by this to say the least. If there is any behavioral guideline that i value it are [[WP:Civ]] and [[WP:Bite]], simply because they create a pleasant, non violent editing sphere. As of such i regularly find myself upon a new user page, dropping a few lines about how to create Reflists, How to link articles, explaining what could be improved be improved in their article and so on. And what is the response to this? A cutout of 1 of my (On average) 2500 edits a month showing i missed some time. How wry is that?

: Now for the explanation: I have been, up till about a month ago, been exclusively a vandalism patrol. For a change of work i decided to give [[WP:CSD]] a try, mainly because it seemed to be a bit linked to my normal [[WP:CVU]] work. The edit you singled out there is one of my early CSD edits, at whose time i was still busy learning the rules, and adapting to the different edit style required for this task. I have stated in the past that my first edits there were quite overzealous, mainly because i tagged anything that seemed to miss even the slightest thing. My reasoning therefore was that if i did something wrong i would get a little nudge from a seasoned editor, and i could always look which pages were, and which were not deleted (Those who are not deleted must have been good articles, and therefor an example of what NOT to delete).

: I have already been whistled at for this editing style, and as of such it has long gone been adjusted to get rid of the deletionism habit i seemed to suffer from. So please, the next time you feel the need to scrub around for an example, please take a recent one. Or at least, you might not want to imply that my tagging is just to "Win favors (To get) upstairs", as i at this time have no desire whatsoever to become an admin. Maybe in the future, but not now. [[User:Excirial|<font color="191970">'''Excirial''']]</font><sup> ([[User talk:Excirial|<font color="FF8C00">Talk</font>]],[[Special:Contributions/Excirial|<font color="FF8C00">Contribs</font>]])</sup> 06:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

==Hello==
I've seen your important contributions for the article [[Recurrence relation]].
I'm looking for the '''general''' (non-iterative) non-trigonometric expression for the exact trigonometric constants of the form: <math>\begin{align}\cos \frac{\pi}{2^n}\end{align}</math>, when n is natural (and is not given in advance). Do you know of any such '''general''' (non-iterative) '''non-trigonometric''' expression? (note that any exponential-expression-over-the-imaginaries is also excluded since it's trivially equivalent to a real-trigonometric expression).
*Let me explain: if we choose n=1 then the term <math>\begin{align}\cos \frac{\pi}{2^n}\end{align}</math> becomes "0", which is a simple (non-trigonometric) constant. If we choose n=2 then the term <math>\begin{align}\cos \frac{\pi}{2^n}\end{align}</math> becomes <math>\begin{align}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\end{align}</math>, which is again a non-trigonometric expression. etc. etc. Generally, for every natural n, the term <math>\begin{align}\cos \frac{\pi}{2^n}\end{align}</math> becomes a non-trigonometric expression. However, when n is not given in advance, then the very expression <math>\begin{align}\cos \frac{\pi}{2^n}\end{align}</math> per se - is a '''trigonometric''' expression. I'm looking for the general (non-iterative) non-trigonometric expression equivalent to <math>\begin{align}\cos \frac{\pi}{2^n}\end{align}</math>, when n is not given in advance. If not for the cosine - then for the sine or the tangent or the cotangent.
[[User:Eliko|Eliko]] ([[User talk:Eliko|talk]]) 08:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

== Re:Lists of mathematics topics ==

I said "delist, per above", meaning that I was agreeing with the above reason regarding the references. Then, my second statment was that this list "is just an outdated featured list". By saying that, I was trying to explain why it lacked proper referencing (it was promoted in October 2005). If you take a look at recent featured lists, you'll see many references cited in-line. So, by saying "outdated", I meant that the method of referencing information in this list was outdated. I hope I made this clearer.--<font style="background:#FFCC00;">[[User:Crzycheetah|Crzy]][[User_talk:Crzycheetah|cheetah]]</font> 22:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

== I have responded to your remarks on my talk page ==

[[User:Beeblbrox|Beeblbrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblbrox|talk]]) 03:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

== [[Cure]] ==

The record of my edits has disappeared. In the edit history, it looks like ''you'' made all the changes I made. Are you going to cut and paste the other contribs history into the history? Just curious. '''''[[User talk:The Transhumanist|<font color="#880088">Th</font><font color="#0000FF">e Tr</font><font color="#449900">ans</font><font color="#DD9922">hu</font><font color="#DD4400">man</font><font color="#BB0000">ist</font> &nbsp;&nbsp;]]''''' 21:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

: It see "Princess Janay" in the edit history, so I don't know why it would look as if I wrote it. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 21:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

:: I made all the changes in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cure&diff=203374774&oldid=203351335 this version], which has ''your name on it''. Where's the record of my changes to the article? '''''[[User talk:The Transhumanist|<font color="#880088">Th</font><font color="#0000FF">e Tr</font><font color="#449900">ans</font><font color="#DD9922">hu</font><font color="#DD4400">man</font><font color="#BB0000">ist</font> &nbsp;&nbsp;]]''''' 21:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

:: See [[Wikipedia:How to fix cut-and-paste moves]]. '''''[[User talk:The Transhumanist|<font color="#880088">Th</font><font color="#0000FF">e Tr</font><font color="#449900">ans</font><font color="#DD9922">hu</font><font color="#DD4400">man</font><font color="#BB0000">ist</font> &nbsp;&nbsp;]]''''' 21:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll look into whether someone skilled in these edit-history merges can do something. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 16:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

==[[Alene B. Duerk]]==
Michael, Thank you for the constructive comments on wikipedia conventions. After spending a great deal of time on the 15-plus articles I recently created or expanded on Navy Nurse Corps directors, I am pleased to see that you have taken the time to polish up all the headings so they will look their best. That's what this collaborative environment is all about. [[User:Mhjohns|Mhjohns]] ([[User talk:Mhjohns|talk]]) 15:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

==Abstract polytopes==
Just a quick "thank you" for tidying the markup, some of which was mine. I owe you an apology for that horrible <=. I had a headache coming on, couldn't remember the HTML entity, and just wanted to get it down quick. -- [[User:Steelpillow|Steelpillow]] ([[User talk:Steelpillow|talk]]) 20:14, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

==[[Order statistic]]==
Regarding "expert" tag, I have now placed something on article talk page. [[User:Melcombe|Melcombe]] ([[User talk:Melcombe|talk]]) 08:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

==[[Conway triangle notation]]==
Thank you for editing work and advice on the above. Can you advise on policy? I have some further 20 useful formulae in Conway notation. Rather than clutter up the original article, I was planning to build a catalogue as a sub heading under my user page and cross refer to/from original article. Is this good practice? [[User:Fjackson|Frank M Jackson]] ([[User talk:Fjackson|talk]]) 12:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
: I'm not sure where, if anywhere, it's stated in official policies, but I don't think links to user pages from article are supposed to be there. Possibly a separate article listing formulas would be appropriate, with [[Conway triangle notation]] and the separate article linking to each other. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 15:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

== TLA ==

Michael, You say "I can't believe someone redirected the correctly hyphenated page to this page with the incorrect title. Now the edit history of the correctly titled article will be destroyed." I understood that if moves were done correctly the page histories and Talk pages moved correctly, and that the edit histories had to be preserved for GFDL reasons. The Talk pages are now in a mess - could you please look at them and tidy them up? There is a lot of discussion at [[Talk:Three letter acronym]], and the page at [[Talk:Three-letter acronym]] now starts with "This page, "Talk:Three-letter acronym", should not be used for any further discussion, as the corresponding page is now a redirect.". Please tidy up after your move! Thanks. (Or, can we just move it back to where it was? A quick Google search suggests that there more uses of the phrase un-hyphenated, and the article title should reflect this.) [[User:PamD|PamD]] ([[User talk:PamD|talk]]) 10:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

==Smile, you're on ANI==
I thought you would like to know that you are being talked about at ANI, [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Harrasment.2Fstalking_by_User:Michael_Hardy|here]]. Regards, [[User:Angusmclellan|Angus McLellan]] [[User talk:Angusmclellan|(Talk)]] 22:05, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
:Hi, thought I'd drop a link to [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive408#Harrasment/stalking by User:Michael Hardy|our discussion]] here. I'm happy to continue discussing this--here or elsewhere--if you have any desire to. Best, [[User:Darkspots|Darkspots]] ([[User talk:Darkspots|talk]]) 15:59, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

== Re: synergetics coordinates ==

In [[Synergetics coordinates]] you wrote:<br>
>This is utter crap. I'll fix it soon unless someone beats me to it.

I could also insult the article you redirected it to because it is ambiguous & incomplete about synergetics coordinates. According to http://www.mathworld.wolfram.com/ they are coordinates based on regular simplexes, which includes tetrahedra besides ''regular'' triangles: [[Triangular coordinates]] does not specify regular triangles. How about trying to improve [[Synergetics coordinates]] instead of being rude without explanation?--[[User:Dchmelik|Dchmelik]] ([[User talk:Dchmelik|talk]]) 05:14, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

: The article stated that they are barycentric coordinates, but the definition given at MathWorld was quite inconsistent with that. It seemed as if you were not paying any attention to the item you were citing. [[Triangular coordinates]] does specify regularity, i.e. the three axes meet at 120&deg; angles. Why should there be two separate articles that say the same thing, and why are you calling them barycentric when you go on to state a definition that makes it clear that they're nothing of the sort? [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 02:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

::Apparently I was wrong that they are barycentric coordinates. However, triangular coordinates do not necessarily use regular triangles, and regular triangular coordinates are only the 1st type of synergetics coordinates: tetrahedral coordinates and higher are not merely triangular coordinates. That is why there should be two articles; they did not say the same thing. I restored [[Syergetics coordinates]] and gave such explanation. If you still want there to be only one of the two articles, it would be better to move them to a new article perhaps with the name that has been proposed 'simplex coordinates.'--[[User:Dchmelik|Dchmelik]] ([[User talk:Dchmelik|talk]]) 04:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
==Barking dogs and barking mad==
Maintaining the patriarchy page can be a nightmare. Unless weasling is reverted at once, it leaves traces in the most surprising places.
Before:
*Patriarchy is rule by fathers and, by extention, male responsibility for society.
After:
*Patriarchy is a word that has been used by some to describe a concept that was used to oppress women. Mary Daly says, "Oppression of women is natural to men, they do it without thought ..."

There's been sufficient interest from good editors recently, that I think I'll start restoring lots of lost text. Weasling will probably end up on more watch lists now.

Anyway, thanks for dropping by. [[User:Alastair Haines|Alastair Haines]] ([[User talk:Alastair Haines|talk]]) 08:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

: Let's see....
:
::: A giraffe is an animal with a long neck.
:
::: A gifaffe is a word that has been used by some to describe the concept of an animal with a long neck.
:
: I wonder which way of saying it is better.....? [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 01:13, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

== [[Isomorphism theorem]] needs your magic ==

Frightening as is. Italic tildes, images of greek letters in running text. Notes to the editor in the article. [[User:JackSchmidt|JackSchmidt]] ([[User talk:JackSchmidt|talk]]) 00:30, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

== Confidence interval ==

Your input at [[Talk:Confidence interval]] would be appreciated, if you feel it's worth the frustration. Thanks. [http://www.reviewingaids.com/awiki/index.php/User:Revolver darin] [[Special:Contributions/69.45.178.143|69.45.178.143]] ([[User talk:69.45.178.143|talk]]) 23:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

==New Project==
Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at [[User:Useight/Highly Active]], as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. [[User:Useight|Useight]] ([[User talk:Useight|talk]]) 17:44, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


== Multiple-Try Metropolis ==

Thankyou for your alterations to the page. I was unaware of the LaTeX code for the angle brackets. [[User:Velocidex|Velocidex]] ([[User talk:Velocidex|talk]]) 21:56, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

==TopologyExpert==

I created a page on local finiteness and I don't know why someone changed it. I want to challenge this article. Also, how do I challenge an article?

Thanks for your help

TopologyExpert <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Topology Expert|Topology Expert]] ([[User talk:Topology Expert|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Topology Expert|contribs]]) 09:28, 5 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

: If by "challenge" you mean nominate it for deletion, the instructions are at [[WP:AFD]]. As to why someone did particular edits, you can ask about that on the article's discussion page or on the user's talk page. Normally an article is to be expected to keep getting changed forever, and one hopes the changes will improve it. Of course, some changes don't improve the article. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 17:48, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

== Vertex angle ==

I noticed in one of your recent edits to [[Vertex angle]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vertex_angle&diff=209750538&oldid=209750260] you mentioned that it was "certainly different from what [you] had in mind." What exactly did you mean? Is there a different kind of "vertex angle" that you were thinking of? --[[user:Pbroks13|<b><font color="black">p<font color="#254117">b<font color="#006600">r<font color="#347C17">ok</font>s</font>1</font>3</font></b>]][[User talk:Pbroks13|<sup><font color="#000000">talk?</font></sup>]] 21:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

: I meant the sort of thing referred to in the red link I created at [[polar sine]], that linked to [[vertex angle]]. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 22:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

== don't forget the edit summary! ==

Michael Hardy, I recently noticed a few edits on my watchlist that you executed that do not have edit summaries and I peeked at your contribution list and this appears to be more popular with you now with 16 of your last 50 edits having no summary. This is just a friendly reminder that they are useful to others, especially when a frequent and long time editor such as your self add them. Cheers, [[User:Pdbailey|Pdbailey]] ([[User talk:Pdbailey|talk]]) 22:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
==don't forget reality==
It's the concept, not the book title. "Affective Computing: italicize book title" And, don't edit when the page is locked. Dig? (C'mon, as an admin you should know that ... right?) [[User:Jim62sch|<font face="Times New Roman" color="FF2400">&#0149;Jim</font><font face="Times New Roman" color="F4C430">62</font><font face="Times New Roman" color="000000">sch&#0149;</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Jim62sch|dissera!]]</sup> 10:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
: If it's the concept rather than the book title, then when is the initial "C" capital? As for the page being locked, I was not aware of that. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 15:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

==RfD nomination of [[:Compact Spaces *]]==
I have nominated {{la|Compact Spaces *}} for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 May 8#Compact Spaces *|the discussion page]]. Thank you. [[User:Olaf Davis|Olaf Davis]] | [[User talk:Olaf Davis|Talk]] 10:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

==RE: [[Purpose]]==

If you read through the section, you will see it is essentially a trivia section, or collection of misc. facts. The first fact was already mentioned in earlier paragraphs. The next fact had to do with purpose as it pertains to running a business, which seemed unrelated, and un-notable. The last thing was a random fact on a broadway play, also unrelated. Hope this helps. [[User:Danski14|Danski14]]<sup>[[User talk:Danski14|(talk)]]</sup> 16:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

== Locally finite collection ==

Hi, thanks for cleaning up the style in the '''Exercises''' section of [[Locally finite collection]]. As I'm sure you're aware, there are somewhat bigger fish to fry then just making the section look pretty per the [[WP:MOS|manual of style]]. Specifically, the issue is [[WP:NOT#TEXT]]. I am of the view that the section should be deleted altogether, but [[User:Topology Expert]] keeps reverting it. I have already incorporated all (or almost all) of the information in the '''Exercises''' section into the article in a more [[WP:TONE|encyclopedic style]]. I have already informed the user about the policy, but he/she doesn't seem interested in discussing it. [[User:Silly rabbit|<font color="#c00000">silly rabbit</font>]] ([[User talk:Silly rabbit|<span style="color:#FF823D;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help"><font color="#c00000">talk</font></span>]]) 16:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

==Topology Expert and Local Connectedness==

Dear Michael Hardy,

As you are aware, I have created a new article on local connectedness. Does this follow the standard Wikipedia conventions? Also, I thought that components and local connectedness have very important relations to each other. Therefore, I decided to add a section on this. I can't see any other article on components. Is it possible for me to change the name of the article from "Locally connected space" to "Local connectedness and components"? This would be a more appropriate name for the article in my opinion.

Also, the article I created on "locally finite collection", I think that the exercises are a key part of the article. Because, even if the reader doesn't wish to solve them, the exercises can be treated as information. This information is indeed part of the article. For example, I gave an exercise regarding the Nagata-Smirnov theorem topology. This can be treated as a fact. I just put it as an exercise. Also, an interested reader may be willing to solve them. They are not in any way a "bad part" of the article. Also, regarding what "Silly rabbit" says, I don't see why he doesn't give a reason why the exercises should be removed. Truthfully, I see nothing wrong with them. Could I please have your opinion on this? Thankyou very much for your help. I have really learnt a lot from you.

[[User:Topology Expert|Topology Expert]] ([[User talk:Topology Expert|talk]]) 02:52, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Dear Michael Hardy,

I have also noticed (when browsing through Wikipedia), that many pages have included the word "local connectedness". All of these words provide a link to the page on connectedness. I think that was perhaps, earlier, the article on "locally connected space" was a stub. Is there away to change all these redirects? I think that if people click on these links, they expect to go to the page on "locally connected space". Thankyou very much for your help.

[[User:Topology Expert|Topology Expert]] ([[User talk:Topology Expert|talk]]) 06:51, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

: OK, I found one of those and edited it [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Topologist%27s_sine_curve&diff=211676052&oldid=204905638 like this]. Doing the same or something similar with the others should take care of it. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 15:58, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

== [[Lommel–Weber function]] ==

You may wish to use the 'preview' button in future before saving a half-written article, or to make the article here [[Special:Mypage/Sandbox]]. I have a feeling I'm teaching my grandmother to suck eggs - if i am apologies. [[User:Ninetyone|ninety]]:[[User talk:Ninetyone|one]] 21:34, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

: Hello. Actually that was occasioned in part by my hastily trying to check some links, and also by the fact that I didn't want some bot to delete the redirect page I'd created to that page on the grounds that the target didn't exist. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 21:41, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

You've been confusing [[Heinrich Friedrich Weber]] (physicist) with [[Heinrich Martin Weber]] (mathematician); they lived at the same time and both worked on mathematics. I think I've sorted them out. [[User:R.e.b.|R.e.b.]] ([[User talk:R.e.b.|talk]]) 15:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

== Equal incircles theorem ==

When I added a new section I guess I trampled on some of your edits. I didn't actually realize they were there, as I had only gotten to the point, of "Gee, I don't remember doing that." I wanted to use latex for some of the formulas and ended up adding a bunch of inline math formulas. I'm not entirely happy with that either, so I'm open to guidance on the whole question of math formatting.--[[User:L mammel|L mammel]] ([[User talk:L mammel|talk]]) 18:24, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

== [[Football pool]] ==

Could you please explain your rationale for moving ''Football pools'' to ''Football pool''? In my experience, the British English usage is always in the plural.[[User:CJPargeter|CJPargeter]] ([[User talk:CJPargeter|talk]]) 07:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

: I've certainly heard the singular used. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 13:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

:: Thanks. I've started a section on the article talk page in an effort to gain a consensus. [[User:CJPargeter|CJPargeter]] ([[User talk:CJPargeter|talk]]) 09:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

== Jennings is dead ==

Howdy, I wrote on the [[Talk:Stephen Arthur Jennings|talk page]] that my info was very incomplete (but gave citations where I could find them, for instance that he is almost certainly dead for over a decade). I might email the math department at UVic to try and at least find the right time period for an obituary. I'm pretty sure he was alive in 1974 and dead in 1997, but not very sure about the middle part. I'm guessing he died in the late 80s to mid 90s and was born in the 10s or early 20s, probably both in Canada. [[User:JackSchmidt|JackSchmidt]] ([[User talk:JackSchmidt|talk]]) 20:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

==Deletion policy==

Since you expressed an interest at some point in [[Systolic geometry]], I suggest you check out the situation with [[Systolic geometry for a beginner]]. [[User:Katzmik|Katzmik]] ([[User talk:Katzmik|talk]]) 13:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

== Creating new articles ==

: Hello, Michael. I'm new to wikipedia and I noticed you've been here for a long time. Could you help me out by telling me how to create an article?

If you enter the title you want to the article to have in the search box, and you're told there's no article with that title, you should see a thing to click on that will take you to the editing page and you can start entering the new article.
:
Generally at the very beginning you should give sufficient context that the reader can tell right away what general subject area the article is to be about. My favorite example remains the article titled [[schismatic temperament]]. The ''usual'' meanings of the words ''schismatic'' and ''temperament'' made me think the article would possibly be about a psychiatric disorder, and nothing at all in the first sentence suggested otherwise, nor told me what it was about. Reading further, I realized it was about musical tuning. So I edited the article to begin with the words "In music, '''schismatic temperament''' is..." etc. That's often all it takes.
:
The title phrase should be set in '''bold''' at its first appearance as in the sentence in quotation marks above, usually in the first sentence. Note that Wikipedia conventions call for rather sparing use of capital letters in article titles and section headings. Thus it would be incorrect to have titled that article [[Schismatic Temperament]] with a capital ''T''. However, it is a good idea to create redirect pages from such incorrect titles, redirecting the user to the correct title. The same applies to plausible alternative titles and commonplace misspellings or misnomers: make them redirect pages. Also, after creating the article, you should figure out which other articles should link to it, including, but not limited to, lists (e.g., see [[list of circle topics]], [[list of inequalities]], etc.). The first letter of a title generally appears as capital but is case-insensitive in links; the later letters are case-sensitive in links.
:
To create section headings just follow the format you see in articles you edit. Type == for a main heading, === for a second-tier heading, etc.
:
Generally '''External links''' should be the last section the reader sees, and category tags and links to counterpart articles in other languages should come below everything the reader sees.
:
And you should follow the norms of [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style]]. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 16:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
:Thanks. [[User:Saepe Fidelis|Saepe Fidelis]] ([[User talk:Saepe Fidelis|talk]]) 03:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
:How do I redirect? [[User:Saepe Fidelis|Saepe Fidelis]] ([[User talk:Saepe Fidelis|talk]]) 04:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Regarding [[Normal distribution]] ==

This is continued from [[User talk:Somebody9973]]. Thank you for explaining what <math>\exp (x)</math> means to me. And I apologize about the other edit. I was just treating every value like a variable, without realizing the context, that <math>\varphi (x)</math> was actually a function. I am wondering however, what this function means. May you please either refer me to a wiki page or explain it on my talk page?

[[User:Somebody9973|The Piano Man]] ([[User talk:Somebody9973|talk]]) 01:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

== Kramers–Kronig relation ==

Hello Michael. You improved the integrals in the ''Kramers–Kronig relation'' article. What I am wondering about, is whether in integrals the "d" in the infinitesimal, like d''x'', should be upright, as is done in [[Differential form]] article. Or should it be in italic, ''dx'', as in the [[Integral]] article. In most text books and scientific papers it is upright, so that is what I often do on Wikipedia. What is your opinion on this? [[User:Crowsnest|Crowsnest]] ([[User talk:Crowsnest|talk]]) 21:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

: I always write them as italic, and that's how I usually see it. I think there are some communities, e.g. possibly physicists, in which the other convention prevails. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 22:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

::Yes, that may explain the different uses. Thanks, [[User:Crowsnest|Crowsnest]] ([[User talk:Crowsnest|talk]]) 07:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

== Can you comment on this article ==

I posted on [[Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Moshe_Rubashkin]] about an article that you edited. Please, could you go there and comment on the situation? --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 22:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

== could you please do me a favor? ==

Hello,

I am a master student at the Institute of Technology Management, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan. Currently I am wrapping up my master thesis titled “'''Can Wikipedia be used for knowledge service?'''” In order to validate the knowledge evolution maps of identified users in Wikipedia, I need your help. I have generated a knowledge evolution map to denote your knowledge activities in Wikipedia according to your inputs including the creation and modification of contents in Wikipedia, and I need you to validate whether the generated knowledge evolution map matches the knowledge that you perceive you own it. Could you please do me a favor?

# I will send you a URL link to a webpage on which your knowledge evolution map displays. Please assign the topic (concept) in the map to a certain cluster on the map according to the relationship between the topic and clusters in your cognition, or you can assign it to ‘none of above’ if there is no suitable cluster.
# I will also send a questionnaire to you. The questions are related to my research topic, and I need your viewpoints about these questions.

The deadline of my thesis defense is set by the end of June, 2008. There is no much time left for me to wrap up the thesis. If you can help me, please reply this message. I will send you the URL link of the first part once I receive your response. The completion of my thesis heavily relies much on your generous help.

Sincerely


[[User:Abhaac|<font color="red">J</font><font color="purple">n</font><font color="blue">W</font>]][[User talk:Abhaac|<sup>talk</sup>]] 07:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
==[[YouTube]]==
This section has beeen moved from the YouTube talk page as it is not strictly article related:

== politeness ==

A distinctive and very consistently practiced part of the culture of youtube is the habitual and seemingly rehearsed boorishness of its management personnel. I would like to write to the CEO of youtube about this. Can anyone tell me the name and postal address of that person? (You can click on "email this user" on my user page.) [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 08:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

The postal address of YouTube is

YouTube, LLC
901 Cherry Ave.
San Bruno, CA 94066
USA
Phone: +1 650-253-0000
Fax: +1 650-253-0001 and the CEO is [[Chad Hurley]].

--'''''[[User:ianmacm|<span style="background:#88b;color:#cff;font-variant:small-caps">♦Ian<span style="background:#99c">Ma<span style="background:#aad">c</span></span>M♦</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ianmacm|(talk to me)]]</sup>''''' 11:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

: Thank you. For some reason I'd thought Hurley was no longer the CEO. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 18:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

== Handfasting and capitalization of neopagan ==
Hi! Thanks very much for quoting the part of [[WP:MOS]] which led you to change occurances of "neopagan" back to "Neopagan" in the [[handfasting]] article. To be clear, would you also prefer to see every occurance of "[[Monotheism|monotheist]]" changed to "Monotheist"? That term isn't the name of a particular religion; it is a description which applies many religions. Isn't the same true of "neopagan"? ([[User:Sdsds|sdsds]] - ''[[User talk:Sdsds|talk]]'') 18:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

: I'd be inclined to say "monotheist" should be lower case since it names only a particular doctrine and religions that share it are not generally related to each other. ''Neopagan'' on the other hand, seems to refer to any religion derived even if tenuously from a certain family of related ancient European religions. There's no precisely defined single doctrine relating them, like monotheism. It's like people referring to a "Judeo-Christian ethic" or the like. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 18:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

== "Sample deleted" ==

Music samples are "generally" not supposed to be longer than 30 seconds or 10% of the length of the original song, whichever is shorter. They're also generally 96kbps, when "reduced quality" is suggested to be 64kbps. I would send them through IFD normally, but this particular uploader had uploaded a few hundred such samples, even after realizing in 2005 or 2006 that the length was problematic, and has since stopped uploading media, and ignores the IFD postings.

I sent one of his uploads through IFD a few weeks ago, and there was no objection to that one, so I've been speedying about 10-20 at a time every few days, waiting to see if anyone objected; if you or anyone else would like to have some of the files undeleted, cut them to below 30 seconds and 10% of the original length and reduce the song quality, I have no problem with that. [[User:Ral315|Ral315]] ([[User talk:Ral315|talk]]) 02:54, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
== FAR Trigonometric functions ==
[[Trigonometric functions]] has been nominated for a [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_review|featured article review]]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to [[Wikipedia:What is a featured article?|featured quality]]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_review|here]]. Reviewers' concerns are [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/{{#if:|{{{2}}}|Trigonometric functions}}|here]].--[[User:Ioannes Pragensis|Ioannes Pragensis]] ([[User talk:Ioannes Pragensis|talk]]) 12:38, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

==LaTex==

Dear Michael,

I normally do not use LaTex; I write mathematics by hand. In fact, I do not now how to type mathematical symbols. I am viewing other pages and learning how a certain symbol is typed and then copying that into my edit. I was planning to do this with the page on the [[Perfect map]] but haven't done so yet. It probably takes time to get used to typing LaTex so it will take a while before I can properly type on Wikipedia. I hope that I am not making it difficult for other people. However, I will try to type everything else as best as I can.

[[User:Topology Expert|Topology Expert]] ([[User talk:Topology Expert|talk]]) 10:30, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

== Perfect map ==

Dear Michael,

Please have a look at the article on [[Perfect map|perfect maps]]. I think that I have improved it to meet Wikipedia standards. Could you please give me your opinion on this?

[[User:Topology Expert|Topology Expert]] ([[User talk:Topology Expert|talk]]) 05:01, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

: It's definitely looking much better now than it was. (I just did a few minor edits on it a minute ago.) [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 19:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

== Correctional facilities... ==

Thanks for the clean up and ...um... minor ''corrections''. :-) --[[User:Jc128842|JeffJ]] ([[User talk:Jc128842|talk]]) 03:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

== [[Central North Correctional Centre]] ==

I saw that you removed the ''Stubs''. I thought the article still seemed a bit stubbley. Your thoughts? (This is still a learning process for me) --[[User:Jc128842|JeffJ]] ([[User talk:Jc128842|talk]]) 03:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

: I prefer to reserve the "stub" notice for articles that leave obvious basic questions unanswered. The mere fact that an article is much shorter than it ideally should be doesn't seem like enough. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 04:18, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

:: Okay, thanks. I also think that I've managed to track down all the [[Correctional facilities of Ontario, Canada]] links in other articles and have updated them. Thanks for your help there, too. --[[User:Jc128842|JeffJ]] ([[User talk:Jc128842|talk]]) 14:07, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

==Countable set==

Dear Michael,

I believe that the user JRSpriggs has given an invalid reason as to why he deleted what I wrote in the article on [[countable sets|countable set]]. He stated that what I added (a topological proof on the uncountability of the real numbers) was 'incompetent and irrelevant'. I don't see why it is 'incompetent'. Also, how can it be irrelevant when it is on countable sets? Could you please have a look at this?

Thanks

[[User:Topology Expert|Topology Expert]] ([[User talk:Topology Expert|talk]]) 08:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

== kocations ==

aww phooey on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=New_York_City_Police_Museum&curid=1457200&diff=219762037&oldid=219761974 fixing it], I was thinking that ''kocation'' was such an interesting twist. <sub>[[User_talk:Travellingcari|TravellingCari]]</sub><sup>[[Special:Contributions/Travellingcari|the Busy Bee]]</sup> 20:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
: I guess we're all to staid for that..... [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 20:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

== Barwise Compactness ==

Thanks very much for your contributions! [[User:Zero sharp|Zero sharp]] ([[User talk:Zero sharp|talk]]) 06:08, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
: You're welcome. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 15:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

== Deletion of the Tube Lemma ==

Dear Michael,

Please see the page on the [[Tube lemma]]. I have nominated it for deletion for several reasons which are given on the discussion page. The main reason is probably the fact that the article doesn't even hint that there is a relation between the tube lemma and compactness but there are other reasons too.

Thanks

[[User:Topology Expert|Topology Expert]] ([[User talk:Topology Expert|talk]]) 11:12, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

== Singular plural ==

Thanks for pointing out the existence of both [[elementary divisor]] and [[elementary divisors]] &mdash; I hadn't spotten that. I've always used the plural, it's just a habit I suppose. Thanks also for the reminder about context. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 20:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

== [[Minneapolis]] reply ==

Nay, I meant in the Minneapolis article we have a tradition of avoiding linking to businesses because there would be far too many businesses to add. But of course you could say "well we link sources" which is of course profit businesses. The point being for now is that we don't necessarily endorse one thing over the other in the External Links section because then we would have every news agency down the block. But you are free to use MinnPost as a source, it is credible in that arena. [[User:Davumaya|.:DavuMaya:.]] 20:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
:I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are asking me. [[User:Davumaya|.:DavuMaya:.]] 22:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I was asking what you intended to be the meaning of that odd locution that you used. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 23:02, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
:I'll defer you to [[User_talk:Michael_Hardy#AfD:_Jacqueline_Eales]]. A qualified [[linguist]] might be able to answer you. [[User:Davumaya|.:DavuMaya:.]] 23:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

== [[Introduction to systolic geometry]] ==

Hi,

[[User:Loom91]] is unhappy with the page. Could you please comment? [[User:Katzmik|Katzmik]] ([[User talk:Katzmik|talk]]) 14:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

== Tube lemma ==

Dear Michael,

I have made some appropriate changes to the article on the [[tube lemma]]. Could you please have a look at it and let me know if there is something wrong with the style of the article? Also, it would be helpful if we could have an image to go with example 1 in the 'examples and properties' section. If you can suggest such an image, that would be great.

Thanks

[[User:Topology Expert|Topology Expert]] ([[User talk:Topology Expert|talk]]) 10:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

== Hu12 ==

Hi, I saw your note on Hu12's talk page. Hu12 has removed a huge number of relevant links (many to Gresham lectures) and blocked a contributor for adding them. He has also reverted some link corrections, leaving broken links (these include some to author profiles in Granta magazine). I'm tempted to simply use rollback to undo the damage he has done, but am concerned that I would be blocked for rollbacking on an admin, so I am undoing them all, which is much slower. Do you think a not to AN or ANI about his odd behaviour would be worthwhile? [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 13:15, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

: I think I'll do an ANI on [[user:Hu12]]. I've been just reverting his edits. I hadn't noticed he was an admin, but I've complained to him and about him (see my edit history of the last half-hour or so). I hadn't noticed he was an admin. He's a clear newbie-biter. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 13:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
:
: PS: I unblocked the user that he blocked. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 13:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

::Thanks [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]]) 13:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
:::By the way the now-unblocked editor isn't all that new - some of the links Hu12 has removed had been in articles for about a year, and incorporated in reference sections by other editors. [[User:DuncanHill|DuncanHill]] ([[User talk:DuncanHill|talk]])


== Strongly disagree ==

Michael,

I strongly disagree with your objection to my gently worded warning. Given the problems we have with spam an editor who does nothing other than add links to a single site may be of good faith but many would regard them as unwelcome. Doing so with a clear link between your name and the site you keep linking to is very worthy of a warning. By the way for the sake of good form could I suggest you use the block review template for dealling with appealled blocks. --[[User:BozMo|BozMo]] [[user talk:BozMo|talk]] 14:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

: I don't think anyone would reasonably regard the particular links to lectures by professors that that user was putting in as in any way objectionable. Moreover, '''if''' there's a conflict of interest, he still hasn't added anything that a neutral user could not very reasonably have added. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 18:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

:: I do apologise but I am not impressed by the amount of fuss which has been stirred up by what could have been dealt with simply by an (arguable) second opinion on a block. And if a clear SPA only adding links who chooses his link target as his name isn't enough then the fact that according to [http://network.nature.com/profile/greshamcollege this] the communications officer for Gresham College is called James Franklin might suggest it too? I think you need a long look in the mirror and then to apologise to Hu12 for all the fuss you have tried to cause him on a completely reasonable course of action by him (which I would have just over-turned on a block review). But I am sure you take a different view of the constructiveness of your behaviour. Perhaps cleaning up a few thousand real pieces of spam like Hu12 does most days would be a good penance. --[[User:BozMo|BozMo]] [[user talk:BozMo|talk]] 19:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

: You still need to look at the nature of the actual links. I don't think there's anything about them that could offend anyone. The conventions on conflicts of interest, the way some people seem to view them, are far too extreme. Supposing he's officially affiliated with the organization he's linking to, as in this case you say he is. Some people in that position would fall into all the pitfalls that go along with such situations and cause us to have a cautions about such situations in our policies. But some are level-headed and avoid those problems, and this appears to be such a case.
:
: I'm not the one who started objection to Hu12's actions; at least two others beat me to it. And if you want to talk about stirring up a fuss, that's exactly what Hu12 has done. What he did was far too extreme. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 20:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

::I thought in your own terms you thought you did fine. My judgement remains the same. His was the molehill perhaps but it is extremely unusual for self promotion by the press officer of an entity as an SPA ro be acceptable (thousands of cases of the other for each one of this) and the fuss was disproportionate. Why AN/I over a block review? The others brought it to you as an admin. You could have put it to bed. --[[User:BozMo|BozMo]] [[user talk:BozMo|talk]] 21:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

: Am '''I''' the one whose "fuss" is disproportionate? The point is that the fuss raised by Hu12 was disproportionate by a HUGE margin. And I think the policy is flawed, and the fact that it led to something so absurd as objecting to these external links is proof that it's flawed. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 23:11, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

== Moved from your userpage... ==

===Thank you===
I'm the author of the article [[Myrzakulov equations]] and I'm not the author of these equations. But I would like ask you to keep this my article. [[Ngn]] 92.46.65.69 (talk) 18:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
:Hey Michael, I just noticed this message someone left at the bottom of your userpage. Cheers, [[User talk:Sarah|Sarah]] 14:15, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
:: Thanks. I remember this being an AfD matter a few months ago; I posted my views in the AfD discussion. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 20:33, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

== Concern ==

I thought hard about mentioning this but here goes. A more sensitive person might be starting to feel a little uneasy. It really does seem as if you're "looking over my shoulder", which could put a chap on edge: I would have welcomed a friendly "Let me help you improve your style", or "Why don't I check over a few of your articles for you", or even "I've noticed some things you might do better" first. Furthermore, some of your edit comments like "I guess Wikipedia's formatting conventions for mathematical article are less than universally understood", "Wikipedia:Manual of Style (mathematics) doesn't exist for the purpose of being completely disregarded" and "This article disregarded Wikipedia:Manual of Style and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (mathematics) in a number of respects" might be more usefully phrased. In particular, pointers to specific stylistic matters, left on my talk page, where I'm likely to see them (or on the page of the editors who actually wrote the words, which wasn't always myself in the articles I mean), would be both helpful and welcome: if you have issues with my style, by all means tell me. I'm saying all this now in what I hope and intend to be the friendliest possible way. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 06:42, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

: I did not intend to imply that your contributions were not valuable, but rather that you can adhere to conventions you see followed in other articles (e.g. you don't see so many capitals in section headings). Things are codified in [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style]] and various more specialized manuals like [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (mathematics)]], but you don't need to learn every detail of those to get the most of what you need. In particular, variables (but not digits and not punctuation) should be italicized in non-[[TeX]] mathematical notation. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 17:49, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

::Thank you for your reply. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 19:27, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

== Recent edit of Discriminant of an algebraic number field ==

Having completely rewritten that article a while back, I was unhappy with your edit summary [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Discriminant_of_an_algebraic_number_field&curid=3022963&diff=223469062&oldid=222810350]. I put a lot of effort into a careful selection of content and presentation and citation, and I even asked for feedback before replacing the page with my new version, and it just seems like your summary is insulting my efforts. Am I wrong? Your edit, while appreciated, certainly didn't warrant your comment (and I'm not sure any of your corrections are related to the math MOS specifically). [[User:RobHar|RobHar]] ([[User talk:RobHar|talk]]) 06:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

== Initial context setting ==

Hello Michael, thanks for your note. Ok, I get it- Wikipedia is not just an encyclopedia of mathematics :). [[User:Delaszk|Delaszk]] ([[User talk:Delaszk|talk]]) 19:44, 5 July 2008 (UTC)


==Hello and Good Day==
{{resolved|image added [[User:Darkspots|Darkspots]] ([[User talk:Darkspots|talk]]) 11:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)}}
Hello sir/maam I am a new user here in wikipedia so i cannot edit protected articles like [[Angel locsin]], i am only just concern of the article because it has no image. I am calmly requesting you to Put this image '''Angel_in_Dubai.jpg''' [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Angel_in_Dubai.jpg click here to see the image], the image was already proven licensed under creative commons and it was already inspected by Flickreviewer,please put it inside [[Angel Locsin]]'s article with the caption of '''Angel Locsin at the Lobo Tour in Dubai'''. Please give me your kindness. Thankyou so much. God Bless You! [[User:Watcher Wiki|Watcher Wiki]] ([[User talk:Watcher Wiki|talk]]) 10:30, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
:Responded on Watcher Wiki's talk page. [[User:Darkspots|Darkspots]] ([[User talk:Darkspots|talk]]) 11:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

==Please cut it out==
OK, enough. I have yet another post, reiterating (again) the same thing, from Michael Hardy on my talk page, and I personally am fed up. I am reminding users, and especially [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] of the following from WP:CIV, an official policy of Wikipedia. These must be avoided:

Judgmental tone in edit summaries ("snipped rambling crap") or talk page posts ("that's the stupidest thing I've ever seen").

In my personal opinion, [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] is in violation of this policy in referring to two users' contributions as "talking nonsense" and referring to one's as "irrational comments." Cut it out NOW, please, or I will have no choice than to bring this to the attention of [[WP:WQA]]. There are strong feelings here, but this is not how to express them. I will leave a copy of this on [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]]'s talk page.--[[User:Wehwalt|Wehwalt]] ([[User talk:Wehwalt|talk]]) 16:26, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

: Those quotation marks do not indicate quotes from anything I wrote.
:
: The net effect of my efforts to bring some common decency into this matter is that I feel treated abusively and I'm surprised that people who claim to care about the welfare of Wikipedia acted as if the matters I brought to their attention were not a problem. Some of them were willing to care about Wikipedia's actual content only after their lack of interest in content was emphasized. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 16:31, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

==Face-transitive vs. Isohedral==
Michael, I have started a discussion at [[Talk:Face-transitive]]. Your input would be welcome. -- Cheers, [[User:Steelpillow|Steelpillow]] ([[User Talk:Steelpillow|Talk]]) 19:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

== Deletion request ==

Hi,

Could you please delete the article [[Serre–Swan theorem]]? I started the article, and so far you and JackSchmidt are the only two editors to have made changes to it (minor typo fixes in each case). I would like to move the existing article Swan's theorem to this location. Thanks, [[User:Silly rabbit|<font color="#c00000">siℓℓy rabbit</font>]] ([[User talk:Silly rabbit|<span style="color:#FF823D;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help"><font color="#c00000">talk</font></span>]]) 14:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

: Done. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 16:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

::Ah. I came across this because this left the redirect [[Serre-Swan theorem]] hanging loose. You have to watch things like that, because if the move is delayed for too long, then the redirect will get deleted by a bot or admin, and will need to be recreated. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] ([[User talk:Carcharoth|talk]]) 23:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

== [[Integral of secant cubed]] ==

Hi there. I'm a big fan of the article and of calculus, however I don't think that it belongs in wikipedia, due to [[WP:Notability]] and [[WP:NOTTEXTBOOK]], and should instead be part of [[Wikibooks:Calculus]]. [[User:Gyro Copter|Gyro Copter]] ([[User talk:Gyro Copter|talk]]) 07:22, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

: It doesn't lack notability. And a textbook would treat the topic differently from the way that page does. Look at Wikipedia's coverage of mathematics generally and you'll start to see that it fits in. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 14:11, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

== Nielsen transformations ==

Howdy, I defined [[Nielsen transformation]] for you. I don't have my references at hand to fill in the rest of the article, but I think the basics are there for you. Basically a Nielsen transformation takes an ordered finite subset of a group to another ordered finite subset of the group. A finite subset of a group is the image of a basis ''X'' of a free group under a homomorphism ''f''. For an automorphism ''a'' of that free group, the Nielsen transformation takes ''f''(''X'') to ''f''(''a''(''X'')).

In other words Nielsen transformations are the only "generally true" ways of taking (ordered) generating sets to generating sets. In vector spaces, an invertible matrix is the same idea. Just like in vector spaces, it is useful (and historically prior) to break these into smaller pieces. In vector spaces, there are the elementary row ops: switch two rows, multiply a row by an invertible scalar, add a row to another row. In groups, we have the same: swap two elements of a generating set, invert one element of a generating set, multiply one element of a generating set by another.

The set of generating sets of a group is partitioned into equivalence classes by the Nielsen transformations, and the study of how many classes is a pretty huge deal in several areas of math. I only care about finite groups. Given any two generating sets of the same size, ''X'' and ''Y'', of a finite group, it is always true that ''X'' &cup; { 1 } and ''Y'' &cup; { 1 } are Nielsen equivalent. This has reasonably deep implications in computational group theory, since it says that for most purposes sufficiently large generating sets are all theoretically the same, so we are free to choose computationally convenient ones, not aesthetically pleasing ones. [[User:JackSchmidt|JackSchmidt]] ([[User talk:JackSchmidt|talk]]) 20:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

: Looks good so far, although it will take me a while to absorb it all. I notice that when I click on "what links here" I find very little. So in the near future you should think about which articles ought to link to this one. I think there's a [[list of group theory topics]], and then there may be various articles where it should be in the "See also" section, and others where it should be in the text of the article. Then you should think about whether there may be other names for the concept or commonplace misspellings or misnomers that ought to redirect to the article. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 22:14, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

::Thanks! I created some inward links. This is mostly not my area, so I could only do this when it was easy. List of gt topics is ... woefully incomplete. There are major headings missing, for instance combinatorial and geometric group theory. I just stuck them in at the end under misc. [[User:JackSchmidt|JackSchmidt]] ([[User talk:JackSchmidt|talk]]) 23:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

== Einstein (typography) ==

My experience is just the opposite — "math" tags have generally produced better-looking equations, symbols, etc. in-line than attempts to use italic, superscript, etc. with normal text, and the latter produce inferior results on some browsers (which is why I originally selected math tag for the cited equation). I don't know why you are getting misaligned results; it worked fine for the browsers I tried (IE6 on XP, FireFox on Solaris). The one visual issue I've seen is that the math font uses serifs while the surrounding text is sans serif. Since the equation is supposed to be somehow delimited from the text, that seems acceptable. — [[User:DAGwyn|DAGwyn]] ([[User talk:DAGwyn|talk]]) 17:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

: This misaligned texts problem has been discussed heavily and incessantly for five-and-a-half years, since we first got [[TeX]] at the beginning of 2003, with no resolution. You must be the only one who's unaware that it's been a big issue. See [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (mathematics)]]. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 17:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

== Wishart distribution ==

Thanks for the enlightenment on fractional degrees of freedom. I am happy with your version of the article. [[User:Perturbationist|Perturbationist]] ([[User talk:Perturbationist|talk]]) 01:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

== Multivariate adaptive regression splines ==

Thanks for taking care of some of the details in this page. I admit the first section "The basics" is not very encyclopedic in tone, I will try to improve that as I gain wikipedia experience [[User:Stephen Milborrow|Stephen Milborrow]] ([[User talk:Stephen Milborrow|talk]]) 19:42, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

== [[Nena]] ==
Hi! Well... it maybe sounded to her like ''nena'' because that was what she was actually being called. ''Nena'' and ''niña'' are synonyms. No "derivation" there, you can take my word for it ;) --[[User:Will vm|Will vm]] ([[User talk:Will vm|talk]]) 22:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

: I answered your question as well at [[Talk:Spanish language]] ;) --[[User:Floridianed|Floridianed]] ([[User talk:Floridianed|talk]]) 00:27, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

:Just in case there is any doubt left, I'm a native Spanish speaker and I can guarantee that ''nena'' is a common Spanish word meaning ''little girl''. --[[User:Jotamar|Jotamar]] ([[User talk:Jotamar|talk]]) 15:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

==Request to move article [[:Megaliths]] incomplete==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important blue.svg|60px|left]]
You recently filed a request at [[WP:RM|Wikipedia:Requested moves]] to move the page [[:Megaliths]] to a different title - however your proposal is either '''incomplete''' or '''has been contested''' as being controversial. As a result, it has been moved to the [[WP:RM#Incomplete_and_contested_proposals|incomplete and contested proposals section]]. Requests that remain incomplete after five days will be removed.

Please make sure you have completed '''all three''' of the following:

# Added '''<nowiki>{{move|NewName}}</nowiki>''' at the top of the [[Talk:Megaliths|talk page of the page you want moved]], replacing "NewName" with the new name for the article. This creates the required template for you there.
# Added '''<nowiki>{{subst:RMtalk|NewName|reason for move}}</nowiki>''' to the bottom of the [[Talk:Megaliths|talk page of the page you want to be moved]], to automatically create a discussion section there.
# Added '''<nowiki>{{subst:RMlink|PageName|NewName|reason for move}}</nowiki>''' to the top of today's section [[WP:RM#Other_proposals|here]].

If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at [[WT:RM|Wikipedia talk:Requested moves]] or contact me on my talk page. - [[User:JPG-GR|JPG-GR]] ([[User talk:JPG-GR|talk]]) 01:00, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

== merge templates on [[Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution]] and [[Maxwell speed distribution]] ==

You put up merge templates in this articles last October. I can't find any argumentation for this on either talk page. Moreover, the two are separate concepts so I would oppose any merger of two. Would you mind if I remove the merge templates? ([[User:TimothyRias|TimothyRias]] ([[User talk:TimothyRias|talk]]) 15:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC))

== harmonic mean over at the reduced mass page ==

Thanks for answering my question on the ref-desk math page. (i was the ip#, just forgot to sign in) [[User:Sentriclecub|Sentriclecub]] ([[User talk:Sentriclecub|talk]]) 20:34, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

== Linear regression ==
Please have a look at the recent edits: "26 July 2008 68.146.25.175 (Talk) (28,676 bytes) (Corrected several errors. See discussion.)". I fear that they are seriously misguided. [[User:Petergans|Petergans]] ([[User talk:Petergans|talk]]) 20:10, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

: I don't see an obvious way in which they're seriously misguided, although I have some qualms about the assertion that the assumption of normality has no consequences under certain conditions. What specifically did you have in mind? [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 23:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

== [[Positive-definite matrix]], help! ==

I need some help. I'm pretty much sick of the math editors on this page, am I out of line, or are these recent edits just disrespectful. These recent edit on this page make me seriously question if my input is helpful here (and maybe it isn't). [[User:Pdbailey|Pdbailey]] ([[User talk:Pdbailey|talk]]) 03:37, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


=="From each according...."==
At Jimbo's page you asked about where in Ayn Rands' writings the above appears, See [[Atlas Shrugged]]--[[User:Buster7|Buster7]] ([[User talk:Buster7|talk]]) 11:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
: That's more than 1000 pages, I think. Can you specify a page number? [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 16:08, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
::No problem...I'll reread the book and get back to you....IN 6 MONTHS. Just kidding. Now I'm curious, too. I thought it was from Marx's Das Kapital, but now I'm not so sure. Will advise.--[[User:Buster7|Buster7]] ([[User talk:Buster7|talk]]) 23:34, 30 July 2008 (UTC)--[[User:Buster7|Buster7]] ([[User talk:Buster7|talk]]) 23:34, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

== [[Stages of growth model]] ==

Hi there. Two thing about the article. Any reason why you moved the page? I've never seen it used with the hyphens and I think it's incorrect to do so. Secondly, this is not a new article nor been expanded recently over the last five days, so I'm wondering why it's on DYK. Thanks --[[User:PatrickFlaherty|Patrick]] ([[User talk:PatrickFlaherty|talk]]) 00:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

: It's not about the "stages" of a "growth model". Thus, the hyphens disambiguate. That is why the traditional standard way of using hyphens like this is useful. (I have no idea why it's on DYK.) [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 15:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

== Math notation ==

Must be a mixup. I don't think I wrote that. Anyway, I am usually careful to put &nbsp's in, although I do slip up every now and again. There are many worse offenders than I in this regard, but thanks for your tireless work fixing others' mistakes. Happy editing, [[User:Silly rabbit|<font color="#c00000">siℓℓy rabbit</font>]] ([[User talk:Silly rabbit|<span style="color:#FF823D;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help"><font color="#c00000">talk</font></span>]]) 15:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Singular_integral&diff=next&oldid=209290582 Here it is]. It's not just the "nbsp"s; it's also that the minus sign needed viagra. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 15:28, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

::I guess so. Yes, you're right about the minus signs too. Old bad habits die hard. ;) [[User:Silly rabbit|<font color="#c00000">siℓℓy rabbit</font>]] ([[User talk:Silly rabbit|<span style="color:#FF823D;font-family:Monotype Corsiva;cursor:help"><font color="#c00000">talk</font></span>]]) 15:32, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

== Partial leverage ==

You are correct of course that leverage and [[partial leverage]] are more generally applicable throughout statistics and not just linear regression. However, we should make it clear that the formula given for the hat matrix there is only for OLS. [[User:Btyner|Btyner]] ([[User talk:Btyner|talk]]) 19:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

: I think you miss the point. You can't write "In multi-linear regression,..." as the first words of an article and expect the lay reader unfamiliar with statistics to understand that statistics is what the article is about. But if you write "In statistics,...", then that is clear. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 19:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

== Formulas ==

Hello. Please notice my edits to [[Rotation operator (vector space)]]. You don't need to write
:
: <math> <A>.\, </math>
:
Instead you can write
:
: <math> \langle A \rangle.\, </math>
:
[[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 03:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
=== Reply ===

In
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula

it is suggested to use the signs + - < > = | (directly)

Do you see any disadvantage?

[[User:Stamcose|Stamcose]] ([[User talk:Stamcose|talk]]) 07:32, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

: Obviously in [[TeX]] if you want to say that ''x'' is less than ''y'', you write
:: <math> x < y.\,</math>
: But when you wrote
:: <math> <A>\, </math>
: you were not trying to say anything is less than or greater than anything. You were using "<" and ">" as [[angle bracket]]s. That is incorrect. you should have written
:: <math> \langle A \rangle.\,</math>
: I don't think the page you cite says that you should have written it the way you did. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 12:54, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

==Decidable sublanguages of XXX ==

Hi Michael,

I noticed your comment in [[Decidable sublanguages of set theory]]:

{{quotation|This is not about linguistics; it's about mathematical logic. You can't assume the lay reader is familiar enough with the subject matter that they don't need to have that pointed out.}}

I never implied in the article that it was about linguistics. I tagged it with Computer Science, Proof Theory, Logic and Model Theory.

There are a lot of small mathematical [[Theory (mathematical logic)|theories]] that are [[Decidability (logic)|decidable]]. (Notice that both of the wikilinks in the previous sentence go back to (Logic) variants of the respective word.

I would like to see a path in Wikipedia that branches from theory to decidable theory, and from domain (arithmetic, set theory, propositional logic, etc.) to decidability. There are a huge number of results in mathematical logic about decidable theories, but I don't think Wikipedia is very well organized in this area.

However, this is not a layman-type area. If you are worried about linguistics quasi-laymen stumbling onto this article and being confused, I'm not sure what to do to make it clear that it's not really about linguistics, which has it's own hierarchy of languages and concept of decidability, e.g. see [[Context-free language]]. The concept of decidable theory in logic and the instances of decidable theories discovered goes far beyond the Chomsky hierarchy of more-or-less restricted grammars.

What do you think?

Thanks,
[[User:Erxnmedia|Erxnmedia]] ([[User talk:Erxnmedia|talk]]) 22:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

::: But you need to tell the lay reader right away what the general subject matter is. Your initial sentence could have confused the reader about that, using the word "language" conspicuously and treating subject matter that the non-mathematician would never have heard of. Saying "In mathematical logic,..." does that. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 22:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

::::OK, good edit. [[User:Erxnmedia|Erxnmedia]] ([[User talk:Erxnmedia|talk]]) 23:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

:One issue is that the article is written in a computer science terminology that isn't well known outside its immediate area. Even as a trained mathematical logician I had to look at one of the references to figure out what a "sublanguage of set theory" is. The reference I looked at proved that the set of satisfiable, quantifier-free sentences in a particular signature is decidable. &mdash;&nbsp;Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 22:39, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

::That's my fault, I was just making a stub article. I have about 20 of the papers collected from when I cared about this subject in the mid-90's, giving 20 or so fragments of set theory that are decidable. When I can dig these out of a box, I will type in the actual fragments that are decidable and make a bigger list. However if someone has a copy of Cantone's book, they can probably see the whole list.

::In general for all decidable languages it would be nice to have a summary of the language and a pointer to the proof.

::I'm not sure what you mean about computer science terminology. Decidable is decidable, it means that a procedure exists which in finite time will tell you that the sentence is either
::*Provable (derivable from axioms and proof rules in a finite number of steps, given by the procedure)
::*Valid (true in a model of the language for all assignments of values to variables)
::Or something like that (memory fades, if I ever knew what I was talking about to begin with).
::
::Outside of set thoery, a notable example of what I think should be in a Wiki branching tree of decidable languages is [[Presburger arithmetic]], which is 0, 1, +, variables, negation and equality. This is decidable. [[Peano arithmetic]], less so (there are statements in Peano arithmetic which are valid but not provable, which makes it interesting).
::
::All in all, Wikipedia is not knitted together well in this area.
::
::Thanks,
::[[User:Erxnmedia|Erxnmedia]] ([[User talk:Erxnmedia|talk]]) 23:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

== Grushko ==

Please see my comment on [[Grushko theorem]] [[User:Katzmik|Katzmik]] ([[User talk:Katzmik|talk]]) 11:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

==[[counterfeit coin problem]]==
i've seen you contributing to this article, would you be so nice to review it in light of [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Counterfeit_coin_problem&diff=227719433&oldid=223778486 new source added] or find someone who would be interested in this? thanks in advance, [[User:Konradek|konradek]] ([[User talk:Konradek|talk]]) 16:33, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

== math formulas question ==

Thanks for your message at my talk page. I am reading up on the math style guidelines and have started working on bringing up the articles I created to coform with them. (I have cleaned up [[Grushko theorem]] for the most part and will clean up the others as well). One of the recommendations [[WP:MSM]] makes is to discourage the use of inline latex formulas and to only use latex code in displayed formulas. I see the point of that but there are a few things that I don't know how to do without latex. I hope you don't mind if I bother you with questions about them. For example, I'd like to use the standard tilde notation for the universal cover of something, such as <math>\tilde X</math>. Is there a way to do that without using the latex markup? I could not find an answer by looking at various links at [[WP:MSM]]. Also, is there an analog of the latex commands \widetilde and \widehat in either the latex markup mode or otherwise? Thanks, [[User:Nsk92|Nsk92]] ([[User talk:Nsk92|talk]]) 20:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

: Unfortunately we have a situation of different browsers displaying things differently. Some things like the tilde above the variable may be impossible without [[TeX]]. When I put those inline I use \scriptsyle and that seems to bring their size down to something comparable with that of the surrounding text on a variety of browsers. But maybe not all. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 21:10, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
::OK, thanks. I will experiment with \scriptsyle. But it would also be nice to be able to put a tilde over an object other than a single variable or to make the tilde over a single variable. Somehow \widetilde does not work here at all (it gives an error code) and using \tilde{xyz} produces this: <math>\tilde{xyz}</math>. Is there any way to make the tilde here appear longer? Thanks again, [[User:Nsk92|Nsk92]] ([[User talk:Nsk92|talk]]) 21:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

== Brun's dots ==

Yes, those were multiplication, thanks for picking them up. BTW do you know a good way of setting two or three lines in a stack in the lower limit of a summation? That sort of thing crops up a lot in analystic number theory. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 19:40, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Are these what you mean?:
:
: <math> \sin\left(\sum_{i=1}^\infty \theta_i\right)
=\sum_{\mathrm{odd}\ k \ge 1} (-1)^{(k-1)/2}
\sum_{\begin{smallmatrix} A \subseteq \{\,1,2,3,\dots\,\} \\ \left|A\right| = k\end{smallmatrix}}
\left(\prod_{i \in A} \sin\theta_i \prod_{i \not \in A} \cos\theta_i\right) </math>
:
:<math>\widehat{\sigma}_{(i)}^2={1 \over n-m-1}\sum_{\begin{smallmatrix}j = 1\\j \ne i\end{smallmatrix}}^n \widehat{\varepsilon}_j^2,</math>
:
[[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 21:05, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that's a useful example, thanks. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 21:57, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
{{Talkback|Elipongo|Todd Bachman}}

== stubs tag ==

Hi there, may I ask why you remove the stub tags so ''early'' ? Maybe some editors like me browse these cats. Which are your basics to do this ? (Friedhof Ohlsdorf) ;-) Thank you (pls answer here) [[User:Sebastian scha.|Sebastian scha.]] ([[User talk:Sebastian scha.|talk]]) 11:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

: I don't think every article that should be expanded should be called a "stub". I think of a stub as an article that's unsatisfactory because it omits essential information without which it cannot be understood, or information that it would be uncontroversially unreasonable to exclude. I think "stub" tags should be deleted BEFORE the article is half as long as [[War and Peace]]. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 14:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

::Hm, okay. That's my opinion also. But how do you decide for example the quantity ? Information aviable for Ohsldorf cemetery is sure less then for [[Alsterdorf]] (e.g.)? I can think of much more things to edit to the quarters, but I have no proper references (or no time to look for refs). And I don't think the kB should be the only point to decide the article quality. (sorry I'm no native speaker, my English is not perfect) Thank you [[User:Sebastian scha.|Sebastian scha.]] ([[User talk:Sebastian scha.|talk]]) 14:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

==2008 Olympics attack on American nationals (2nd nomination)==
I have re-nominated this article for deletion. Please provide your input to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008 Olympics attack on American nationals (2nd nomination)|the discussion]]. --[[User talk:Elliskev|Elliskev]] 17:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

== Todd Bachman==
Well I am an American and I've never heard of him before. He may have been a "noted horticulturalist" in his home town, but this person was never in the wider public eye before his tragic death. --[[User:Tocino|Tocino]] 21:20, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

: You've probably never heard of MOST people who are notable. Neither has anyone else. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 21:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

== Estimation of covariance matrices ==

Hi Michael. Please have a look at [[Talk:Estimation of covariance matrices]]. Regards [[User:Bo Jacoby|Bo Jacoby]] ([[User talk:Bo Jacoby|talk]]) 08:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC).

== Re: Who wrote what ==

Michael, I did not accuse you of writing the lead in [[estimation of covariance matrices]]. I was merely looking at your userpage as you said you had been involved in a lot of maths articles, and I picked one of the articles that it says on your page that you originated at random, to see if it was an example for the discussion at the Village Pump. Picking one of those on your page was easiest, as they were at my fingertips so to speak. Just to clarify then, I didn't say you wrote the lead, only that it was one you had originated it. That wasn't to fault you. In fact, if you had written the lead, I wouldn't say that was a bad thing: after all, a complex article is better than no article at all, right! Sorry for the misunderstanding. [[User:Deamon138|Deamon138]] ([[User talk:Deamon138|talk]]) 20:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

== AfDs ==

Hello, I just want to drop you a personal (as if anything as open as wikipedia can ever be 'personal'!) note that I have a lot of respect for your contributions to the stats articles here. I hope that you don't take my AfDs the wrong way - I'm just trying to help as much as I can. Regards&mdash;'''''[[User:G716|<font color="Purple">G716</font>]]'''''&nbsp;&lt;[[User talk:G716|<sup>T</sup>]]·[[Special:Contributions/G716|<sub>C</sub>]]&gt; 07:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
::On a slightly different note - I'm astonished that there's no delsort page for mathematics (or for a lot of other sciences for that matter) AfDs. Do you know how to get one? I went over to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting]], but couldn't figure out the process for proposing / creating a new delsort page.--&mdash;'''''[[User:G716|<font color="Purple">G716</font>]]'''''&nbsp;&lt;[[User talk:G716|<sup>T</sup>]]·[[Special:Contributions/G716|<sub>C</sub>]]&gt; 07:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

== My bad ==

Sorry Michael I must have missed that :S thanks for correcting me, Mikola (Nick). <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Lapkam13|Lapkam13]] ([[User talk:Lapkam13|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Lapkam13|contribs]]) 02:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

==Current==
:Mike or is it Michael? I have moved the page as you undoubtedly have noticed. I do not think there will be any disputing the move. If you have a few questions, ask me. I am a little tired of the drama on wikipedia; it doesn't serve anyone to have this crazy stuff going on. How about some feedback, but please let's leave the games out of it, deal? I think the term stabbing or stabbings is a really terrible term. You can't possibly argue that a stabbing isn't an attack anyway. One last point, why can't the diehard or Wikipedians that are on here more than ten hours a week let regular people (by the way, I could easily be an expert on certain things) have their edits? Regards. [[User:Overmoon|Overmoon]] ([[User talk:Overmoon|talk]]) 09:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

:Also I noticed you don't have another way of contacting you. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss math or similar topics with you. [[User:Overmoon|Overmoon]] ([[User talk:Overmoon|talk]]) 09:13, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I think if you click on "email this user", the address is current, so that should work. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 19:05, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

== Pro-tip ;-) ==

I know you were fixing items in [[Joe Bottom]] to better reflect style, and thank you for selflessly helping out --but be careful not to tweak the hidden wikilinks, in which case [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Joe_Bottom&diff=232818374&oldid=232121598 you'll break them]; i.e.: by changing <nowiki>[[World record progression 4x100 metres freestyle relay|4x100&nbsp;meter freestyle relay]]</nowiki> to <nowiki>[[World record progression 4&times;100 metres freestyle relay|4&times;100-meter freestyle relay]]</nowiki>, you broke the actual left-side wikilink to [[World record progression 4x100 metres freestyle relay]]. The stuff on the left of the "|" should be left alone if its not a red link or redirect. --[[User:Bobak|Bobak]] ([[User talk:Bobak|talk]]) 14:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

: This raises the obvious question of whether
:
::: World record progression 4x100 metres freestyle relay
:
: should be changed to:
:
::: World record progression 4×100 metres freestyle relay
:
: [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 16:24, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

== Re: ndash rather than hyphen ==

The answer is yes and no.

Yes, the user may write: <pre>{{bibleverse||Genesis|5:12&ndash;13}}</pre> producing the following: {{bibleverse||Genesis|5:12&ndash;13}}.

We cannot force this to be the case, as there is no function template (to my knowledge) that finds and replaces a substring. The dash isn't part of the template itself. What we can do is recommend the use of ndash in the template documentation.

[[user:jnothman|jnothman]] [[User_talk:jnothman|<sup>talk</sup>]] 00:23, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

: Thanks; I've changed to all ndashes in one article. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 19:22, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

== Red links are desirable ==

Thank you for your advice regarding this matter. I shall heed it when considering the removal of red links next time. [[User:Myominane|Myominane]] ([[User talk:Myominane|talk]]) 16:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

== Re: Dumbing down ==
Wowsers! Congrats in finding that edit. :) Long long time ago. --[[User:Woohookitty|''Woohookitty'']]<sup>[[User talk:Woohookitty|Woohoo!]]</sup> 04:47, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

: Actually, somebody pointed out your edit on the talk page; I didn't actually find it myself. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 19:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


{{talkback|Fatal!ty|Irrational edit}}

== Irrational edit ==

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bartosz_Kupper&diff=prev&oldid=234761898 This] is what the article was the article looked like when I placed a a CSD tag on it. The new article was simply copied and pasted from [[Grzegorz Rasiak|this]] article, and it seemed to me as the user was just fooling around. I also based this inference on the fact that this was the user's first [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/TrickStarBK Contribution], and the action may have simply been infamiliarity with Wikipedia policy. Cheers --[[User:Fatal!ty|Fatal!ty<font color="red" size="5px"></font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Fatal!ty|(T☠LK)<font color="blue" size="5px"></font>]]</sup> 01:35, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

== [[non-standard analysis]] ==

I notice you were interested in the subject at some point, please see my comments at the article discussion page. [[User:Katzmik|Katzmik]] ([[User talk:Katzmik|talk]]) 09:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

== Nena word in the RAE's dictionary ==

The dictionary of the "Real Academia de la Lengua Española" says about the word "nena" [http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltConsulta?TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=nena]:

'''nene, na.'''
(Voz infantil).
1. m. y f. coloq. Niño de corta edad.
2. m. y f. coloq. U. como expresión de cariño para personas de más edad, sobre todo en la terminación femenina.
3. m. irón. Hombre muy temible por sus fechorías.

Into English:

'''nene, na.'''
(infantile word).
1. m. and f. coloq. Young boy or girl.
2. m. and f. coloq. As an expression of affection for people of more age, mainly in the female. (Like "baby" in English).
3. m. ironically. Very frightful man by its misdeeds.

[[User:Ascosphaera|Ascosphaera]] ([[User talk:Ascosphaera|talk]]) 09:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

: Thank you. Apparently [[Nena]] herself was confused about some details of the origin of her adopted name. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 16:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

== Adaptive Audio article ==

Michael - I want to write a specific article for Adaptive Audio - the product, just like Microsoft Outlook, with references to the official web site, like velcro. I have read the notability guidelines and believe I have enough independent references in magazine articles etc to meet these standards. Should I just go ahead and add these and make the article more Adaptive Audio product specific, without sounding sales oriented? I can keep the tone neutral - I just wanted to makes sure there is no COI here with me editing this article under those circumstances. Also, do I need to run this by Calltech and the other that edited my article so far to remove the external links etc?

[[User:D3innovation|D3innovation]] ([[User talk:D3innovation|talk]]) 22:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

== math-citation ==

Hi,
Greathouse at some point created this template but seems to have lost interest in working on it. I recall you were interested in something of this sort. The current version of the template cannot handle books (only articles). Do you have any experience in this? [[User:Katzmik|Katzmik]] ([[User talk:Katzmik|talk]]) 13:34, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

== Re: Proof that pi is less than 22/7 ==

In response to your post on my talk page:

The textbook says: circumference of a circle / diameter of same circle = pi.

In school, one is taught this and looks at circles and manages to work out a couple of decimal places of pi. Mathematical people have proved time and time again that pi ~ (from memory) 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944. That is less than 22/7 (work it out). Ergo, pi < 22/7.

I think many people who are not as well versed in maths as most of the editors of that page would not understand why that page exists, and it needs to be made clearer to them (me included). {{unsigned|Thelb4}}

: That is a truly bizarre way of viewing things, almost bordering on psychotic, as it appears to me. We face a question:
:
::: '''Question:''' How do we humans know that pi&nbsp;=&nbsp;3.14159..., etc., so that we can assert that in our textbooks?
:
::: '''Thelb4's Answer:''' Because our textbooks tell us so. And "mathematical people have proved it".
:
::: '''Question:''' How did they prove it?
:
::: '''Thelb4's Answer:''' The textbooks and the history books say they have. That's how.
:
: You stop BARELY short of asserting that that number was brought down from Mount Sinai by a prophet and that that's how we know it. The article on which you comment, on the other hand, tries to EXPLAIN how it can be known (although not as many digits as you quote above). [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 18:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

== Mu Sigma Rho ==

* 17:16, 19 April 2008 Stifle (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Mu Sigma Rho" ‎ (A7 (group): Group/band/club/company/etc; doesn't indicate importance/significance)
:Is there a reason for this deletion that does not apply equally to '''all''' of the honor societies in the long list at [[Honor society]] that have Wikipedia articles? [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy|talk]]) 22:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
:To be honest I personally think they should all be deleted, but that's not the consensus. [[User:Stifle|Stifle]] ([[User talk:Stifle/wizard|talk]]) 13:20, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

== re Block ==

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3A76.117.6.149]
Please shorten that to 24-31 hours, it is an IP, and we don't know whether it has has potentially multiple users behind it yet.--[[User:Tznkai|Tznkai]] ([[User talk:Tznkai|talk]]) 06:23, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

== transfer principle ==

Hi,
Thanks for your comments on the transfer principle. I find the material in your version very good. I have a small quibble concerning the discussion of the hyperreal interval [0,1]^*. At some point there is a slightly ambiguous statement that might be interpreted as meaning that ALL hyperreals infinitely close to points in [0,1] are included, whereas in reality there is an extra condition at the endpoints. [[User:Katzmik|Katzmik]] ([[User talk:Katzmik|talk]]) 10:30, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

: Thank you. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 17:24, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

::Please respond to my comment at [[talk:transfer principle]]. [[User:Katzmik|Katzmik]] ([[User talk:Katzmik|talk]]) 12:20, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
and again [[User:Katzmik|Katzmik]] ([[User talk:Katzmik|talk]]) 14:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

== Spacing in math formulas questions ==

Sorry to bug you with this, but since you are sort of an expert on math style issues, I'd appreciate a bit more advice. As you suggested, I looked up [[WP:MSM]], but I don't really see spacing in math formulas being discussed there. Is there another place where this issue is addressed and discussed in detail? In particular, I am still not quite sure how to deal with inequalities and predicates. In particular, which is preferable:
:g∈G
or
:g ∈ G?
Similarly, ''H''≤''G'' or ''H'' ≤ ''G''? Likewise, n ≥ 0 or n≥0? And would there be any difference between how these issues are treated in displayed and in-line formulas? Thanks, [[User:Nsk92|Nsk92]] ([[User talk:Nsk92|talk]]) 13:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

: I think this is dealt with at [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (mathematics)]], which says spaces should surround such binary operation and binary relation symbols, thus matching [[TeX]] style (it's been a while since I've looked at that manual). With binary operations like "+" I prefer to make the space non-breakable. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 18:19, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
::No, actually, [[WP:MSM]] does not say this now. It is probably a good idea to add it back there. What about g∈G vs g ∈ G? Thanks, [[User:Nsk92|Nsk92]] ([[User talk:Nsk92|talk]]) 19:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
::: Same thing. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 21:08, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

== [[Fourier series]] ==

Thank you for fixing up my math notation. A good deal of that was copy and pasted together because I'm not too fluent in using the math syntax. [[User:RJFJR|RJFJR]] ([[User talk:RJFJR|talk]]) 16:55, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Please check my math notation at [[fourier series]]. The section on determining coefficients was changed into a second example so I added it again and this time expanded more of the calcualtions. I think the equations need a line break added but don't know how to do it. Also, I think I had an and bn mixed up and one point. If you could also check the math it would be appreciated. Thank you. [[User:RJFJR|RJFJR]] ([[User talk:RJFJR|talk]]) 03:23, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

== Grammar ==

My apologies for the slip [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion&diff=237716258&oldid=237509891]. However, I do hope you noticed that the subsequent paragraph says "...perhaps we need a suitable criterion...", so I'm not illiterate as your post appears to imply. I do object to having English grammar lessons, even from fellow mathematician-pedants, when I'm not in need of one.

I also noticed that you interrupted the discussion solely to point this out, and not to actually say anything relevant to the discussion as to whether a criterion is required. I wouldn't have minded as much if you'd actually contributed something worthwhile. --[[User:RFBailey|RFBailey]] ([[User talk:RFBailey|talk]]) 02:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

== transfer ==

Hi,
Please take a look at the lead at [[transfer principle]]. Is it at odds with the first paragraph of the first section following it? [[User:Katzmik|Katzmik]] ([[User talk:Katzmik|talk]]) 13:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

== [[tessarine]] ==

Hi,
Could you please comment at the deletion page? [[User:Katzmik|Katzmik]] ([[User talk:Katzmik|talk]]) 15:29, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

== [[Chernoff bound]] ==

Hi,

could you please have a look at the revised version of the article? Hopefully, it is more clear (from the mathematical point of view); however, I am not sure I conform to all the wiki-standards. It would be wonderful if an experienced wiki-person would have a look.

Thanks, [[Sodin | Sasha]]

== Thank you… ==

…for restoring me to "couth"ness [[image:face-smile.svg|25px]]. I've worked enough with LaTeX2e that I should have known better. As for inline TeX, I guess it's a matter of opinion, but I can see that HTML would be better in general. Thanks again. -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] ([[User talk:Avraham|talk]]) 21:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

== Re: Student's t ==

Last year someone confused two sided and one sided confidence intervals and thought the table was wrong and changed the table. I wasn't aware of that edit, as I didn't have the Student's T article on my watchlist. I happened to visit that article because I wanted to look up the critical T-values. I saw that the values did not agree with those from my calculator and Mathematica. I then saw that the table couldn't possibly be correct, because the first entry in the top column was 50% which should correspond to a T value of zero by symmetry. I then corrected that error. [[User:Count Iblis|Count Iblis]] ([[User talk:Count Iblis|talk]]) 19:58, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

== 2008 meetup ==
<hr style="background:#fc6; border:#0cf 10px dotted;">
<div style="float:left; padding:10px 10px 0 0; clear:left">[[Image:Flag of Minnesota.svg|100px]]</div><div style="float:left; clear:none; padding:10px"><div style="font-size:150%; padding-bottom:0.5em">Minnesota Meetup</div><div style="font-size:100%">Saturday, [[2008-10-11]] noon (12:00)<br /></div></div><div style="font-size:120%; float:right; padding:10px">Please pass this on! [[Wikipedia:Meetup/Minneapolis#2008_meetup|RSVP here.]]</div>
<hr style=" clear:both; background:#fc6; border:#0cf 10px dotted;"></div>

You said you wished you could have made the last meetup, so I wanted to make sure you knew about this one. Hope to see you there. [[User:Jonathunder|Jonathunder]] ([[User talk:Jonathunder|talk]]) 17:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

== Please be civil ==

Your post, "Before graphing calculators they used common sense (except for people who didn't use common sense). Look: If you don't understand graphs of polynomials, rational functions, exponential and logarithmic functions, etc. without a graphing calculator then you don't understand, and a calculator won't change that. Calculators are not supposed to be a substitute for using your head. Nor are they supposed to be an anesthetic." can be interpreted as incivil. Please rephrase your comments in a more polite way please. I recommend you reread the rules of the reference desk, in particular, "Be polite and assume good faith, especially with users new to Wikipedia." Thank you. [[User:ScienceApe|ScienceApe]] ([[User talk:ScienceApe|talk]]) 03:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

: Why would it be considered uncivil? The person asked how to do something without graphing calculators, for which in fact graphing calculators don't help. I told him that. You need to understand the problem INSTEAD of using a calculator as a substitute for understanding. That answered the most important part of the question. You quote the rules: Be polite and assume good faith. That's what I did. Should I have lied and said a graphing calculator would help him understand when it won't? [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 05:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

== Mathematical Editing ==

Hi Michael, I hope you're well. You seem to be quite an expert when it comes to mathematical type setting within Wikipedia. It seems that you spend a lot of your time correcting mistakes like ''n-1'', etc. Do you think there's a way that Wikipedia itself could be changed so that if one types ''n-1'' then the correct version is returned? It would save a lot of time and effort. Some of the command lines to get ''n-1'' looking like it should a very long, and especially for new editiors, they are totally incomprehensable. Can you see a solution? [[User:Declan Davis#top|<span style="background-color:green;color:gold;">&nbsp;<i><b>Declan Davis</b></i>&nbsp;</span>]] [[User talk:Declan Davis#top|<span style="background-color:green;color:gold;">&nbsp;<i><b>(talk)</b></i>&nbsp;</span>]] 15:11, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

: I guess you don't have anything to say... oh well :o( [[User:Declan Davis#top|<span style="background-color:green;color:gold;">&nbsp;<i><b>Declan Davis</b></i>&nbsp;</span>]] [[User talk:Declan Davis#top|<span style="background-color:green;color:gold;">&nbsp;<i><b>(talk)</b></i>&nbsp;</span>]] 02:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid such things might require human judgment that can't be automated, but I haven't thought through all the issues. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 02:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

== Traffic statistics ==

Hi Michael,
In september the page [[non-standard calculus]] really took off and shows 40 hits daily on the average. I think this is a great chance to influence things here. I am still hoping some better trained people than I will comment on my edits here as well as [[transfer principle]] where I wrote a rather daring introduction which I imagine not everyone agrees with. [[User:Katzmik|Katzmik]] ([[User talk:Katzmik|talk]]) 16:09, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

: How does one find out how many hits a page is getting? [[User:Declan Davis#top|<span style="background-color:green;color:gold;">&nbsp;<i><b>Declan Davis</b></i>&nbsp;</span>]] [[User talk:Declan Davis#top|<span style="background-color:green;color:gold;">&nbsp;<i><b>(talk)</b></i>&nbsp;</span>]] 16:37, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
:: See [http://stats.grok.se this site]. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 02:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

== [[Minimum distance estimation]] ==

Hello. I've cobbled together a start for the article, but as your statistical expertise far outweighs mine, could I trouble you to look it over? Thank you. -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] ([[User talk:Avraham|talk]]) 19:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

==[[The Shipman Inquiry]]==
Hi, I just noticed that you've been removing the "The" from this article's title to make it just "Shipman Inquiry". I think the 'the' should be kept however, since it is part of the name on the front of the report, rather like [[The Hobbit]] for example... See [http://www.the-shipman-inquiry.org.uk/home.asp here] for confirmation. [[User:Malick78|Malick78]] ([[User talk:Malick78|talk]]) 20:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

== Easy as pi?: Making mathematics articles more accessible to a general readership ==

The discussion, to which you contributed, has been archived, ''with very much'' additional commentary, <br>
at [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 35#Easy as pi?]] (subsectioned and sub-subsectioned). <br>
A related discussion is at <br>
(Temporary link) [[Talk:Mathematics#Making mathematics articles more accessible to a general readership]] and <br>
(Permanent link) [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mathematics&oldid=241439749 Talk:Mathematics] (Section "Making mathematics articles more accessible to a general readership").
Another related discussion is at <br>
(Temporary link) [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Making mathematics articles more accessible to a general readership]] and <br>
(Permanent link) [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics&oldid=241487420 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics] (Section "Making mathematics articles more accessible to a general readership"). <br>
-- [[User:Wavelength|Wavelength]] ([[User talk:Wavelength|talk]]) 01:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

== Nice work. ==

Thanks for all the clean up on [[Fourier transform]]. You have a sharp eye. [[User:Thenub314|Thenub314]] ([[User talk:Thenub314|talk]]) 13:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

== Sorry about me getting touchy-feely about the balloon calculus affair ==

<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[Image:Smiley.svg|left|62px]]

[[User:VasileGaburici|VG]] [[User_talk:VasileGaburici|&#x260E;]] has smiled at you! Smiles promote [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]] and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing! <br /> <small>''Smile at others by adding {{tls|Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.''</small>
</div><!-- Template:smile -->

I had already been accused of bad faith by an admin after the Esquisse AfD the other day, so my fuze was getting a bit short. [[User:VasileGaburici|VG]] [[User_talk:VasileGaburici|&#x260E;]] 01:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

==Minneapolis Meetups==

Town Hall Brewery
[http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&q=Minneapolis+Town+Hall+Brewery&fb=1&near=Minneapolis,+MN&cd=1&cid=0,0,1651503314640040051&li=lmd&ll=44.975182,-93.247919&spn=0.034609,0.073986&z=14 maps.google.com]
1430 Washington Ave S
Minneapolis, MN 55454
(612) 339-8696
October 11, 2008
Saturday at 12:00 noon (midday)
[[Wikipedia:Meetup/Minneapolis#2008_meetup|Meetup RSVP]]

Muddy Waters
[http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&q=muddy+waters+minneapolis&fb=1&cid=16952888972669250779&li=lmd&ll=44.960607,-93.287573&spn=0.034618,0.073986&z=14 maps.google.com]
2401 Lyndale Ave S
Minneapolis, MN 55405
(612) 872-2232
October 10, 2008
Friday at 10:00 PM (at night)
[[Wikipedia:Meetup/Minneapolis#Alternate_2008_Meetup|Alternate meetup RSVP]]

Hope you can make it. Feel free to pass along these invitations. -[[User:SusanLesch|SusanLesch]] ([[User talk:SusanLesch|talk]]) 17:52, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

== edit summary ==

Michael Hardy, don't forget about the edit summary [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Multinomial_logit&diff=243357857&oldid=243082966 and marking the edit minor]. [[User:Pdbailey|Pdbailey]] ([[User talk:Pdbailey|talk]]) 04:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

== Thanks for the edits to [[Modes of convergence (annotated index)]] ==

Hi Michael, I manually reverted the changes you made to the section depths and left a note in the discussion page, but everything else is much appreciated! [[User:Wikimorphism|Wikimorphism]] ([[User talk:Wikimorphism|talk]]) 06:23, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

== Probability categories ==

I've been working on some articles like [[Lee-Yang theorem]] and [[Ursell function]] that ought be be listed by the math bots as mathematics, but I'm not sure what math categories would be best. Do you have any good ideas about probability categories they would fit into? [[User:R.e.b.|R.e.b.]] ([[User talk:R.e.b.|talk]]) 18:15, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

: I've put the "probability distributions" category on the second one, and I see that someone's done the same with the first one. [[User:Michael Hardy|Michael Hardy]] ([[User talk:Michael Hardy#top|talk]]) 17:46, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

== RFC Bates method article ==

I am contacting you quite randomly. For the following reason.
The reason is the Bates method article, which in my opinion is edited by parties who are far from objective. Most logical associated party ophthalmology or a group focussed on just being skeptic. I am hoping for your comment on some current essential and interesting issues. Issues in which presenting objective strong arguments are completely neglected and ignored. If you have time and are willing to share you opinion and arguments, please do. My goal is to come to some kind of decision tool. By clearly stating if an argument is valid or not by the objective editor. My request is also to give a weight-factor for example between 1 and 10. For exmple1 for a valid argument but not very important and 10 for a very important argument. And zero for a fake-argument. Please feel free to comment and look at the current three RFC. Nr 1, Nr 2 and Nr 3 on the talkpage of the Bates method article. [[User:Seeyou|Seeyou]] ([[User talk:Seeyou|talk]]) 20:49, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

==Proposed deletion of Sikhism other observations==
[[Image:Ambox warning yellow.svg|left|48px|]]
A [[Wikipedia:Proposed deletion|proposed deletion]] template has been added to the article [[Sikhism other observations]], suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's [[Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion|criteria for inclusion]], and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "[[Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not|What Wikipedia is not]]" and [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|Wikipedia's deletion policy]]). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the <code>{{tl|dated prod}}</code> notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on [[Talk:Sikhism other observations|its talk page]].

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the [[WP:PROD|proposed deletion process]], the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion|speedy deletion criteria]] or it can be sent to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion|Articles for Deletion]], where it may be deleted if [[Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus]] to delete is reached.<!-- Template:PRODWarning --> [[User:Neelix|Neelix]] ([[User talk:Neelix|talk]]) 14:16, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

== Re deleting my 3 entries each describing unique unsolved conjecture ==

Michael,

I noticed that you expressed lack of understanding what my entries are all about and how they differ from each other ...
Rather than deleting those entries - would it make instead sense to investigate it further with the goal to improve the content and its appearance ?
[[User:Apovolot|Apovolot]] ([[User talk:Apovolot|talk]]) 20:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

== Re: section depths ==

Unfortunately, the maximum section depth is four equals signs “<math>====</math>”, and so to accomodate four section levels it is necessary to start with one “<math>=</math>”, and in the rare case of the modes of convergence index, I don't think it's worth sacrificing the logical content that section nesting provides for the sake of typesetting. I agree it's inoptimal, but I think it's best to err on the side of content here. ^.^ [[User:Wikimorphism|Wikimorphism]] ([[User talk:Wikimorphism|talk]]) 04:38, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:42, 12 October 2008

Template:WP Film Sidebar

Shortcut

Handbook

Open tasks

These tasks should be done as often as needed—ideally, on a daily basis.
Assessment
  • Monitor the daily assessment log. The main things to look for:
    • Articles being removed. This is usually legitimate (due to merges or non-film articles getting untagged), but is sometimes due to vandalism or broken template code. Also note that even though the banner and tags remain on the talk page, assessing a Future-class will remove the article from the bot's listing.
    • Articles being moved to "GA-Class" and higher quality. These ratings need to correspond to the article's status in the GA and FA lists, as well as our A-Class review.
    • All newly added articles should be quickly scanned to see if additional task force tags or other maintenance tags (such as "needs infobox") are required.
  • Deal with any new assessment requests, B-class articles needing review, and the unassessed articles.
Peer review
  • For each new peer review request:
    1. Add the review to the {{WPFILMS Announcements}} template.
    2. Leave a note on the main project talk page, and with each appropriate task force or contact (if any), using the following boilerplate: {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/Peer review notice|Name of article}} ~~~~
  • For each peer review that has been archived:
    1. Remove the review from the {{WPFILMS Announcements}} template.
    2. Check the talk page to see that the parameter has been changed from "peer-review=yes" to "old-peer-review=yes".
A-Class review
Featured content
Member outreach
Other
  • Fix the {{Film}} syntax on any articles in Category:Incorrectly tagged WikiProject Films articles. The main culprits are the following:
    1. Deleted peer-review or old-peer-review parameters. Restore as appropriate.
    2. No WP Films peer review subpage. This usually occurs when editors turn on the peer-review tag in our banner but use the main peer review page. Open the banner, click on the peer review redlink, and redirect the page (Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Peer review/Foo film) to the original peer review page (Wikipedia:Peer review/Foo film).
    3. Changed page name. Do as above, but redirect to the wherever the original peer review was.
    4. Start or Stub articles that meet all of the B-Class parameters. Check the article to see if they actually do. If not, change the relevant parameters. If they do, then reassess the article to B-Class.
    5. A-Class articles which have not passed A-Class review. (To be effective shortly when the dormant parameter is activated.) Re-tag down to GA (if already earned) or B.

One-time tasks

These tasks are targeted housekeeping drives which require immediate attention only once or infrequent maintenance.
  • Task force tagging - several task forces are in need of comprehensive "search and tag" runs so that the vast majority of their articles are identified and tagged. Most notably the following:
    • War films
    • Film awards (well-tagged, but needs a more thorough follow-up)
    • Film festivals (well-tagged, but needs a more thorough follow-up)
  • Retagging all instances of {{FilmsWikiProject}} to {{Film}}. Very low-priority.

Toolbox

New task force

N.B.: Creating a task force involves a great deal of work, and is very time-consuming to reverse if an inappropriate or misnamed group is created. It is generally inadvisable to create task forces without prior discussion—particularly regarding the name and scope—on the project's main talk page.

Before a task force can be created, it is necessary to decide on a name for it. The process requires both a full name (e.g. "French cinema" or "Film festivals") and a one- or two-word or acronym shorthand used for some template parameters (e.g. "French" or "Festival"). The instructions below use the "Fooish cinema" task force (shortened to "Fooish") as an example; when creating an actual task force, remember to substitute the correct name, rather than actually creating the example pages.

  1. Create the task force page:
    1. Create the main task force page (Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Fooish cinema task force) with {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators/Task force|Fooish cinema|Fooish}} as the content.
    2. Fill in the "Scope" section on the new task force page.
    3. Create the task force talk page (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films/Fooish cinema task force) with {{WPFILMS Sidebar}} as the content.
  2. Add support for the task force to {{Film}}:
    1. Select an image to use as the task force icon. The image should be recognizable at a small size and reasonably representative of the topic of the task force.
    2. Add the task force display code (shown below) to the task force section of {{Film}}, in correct position among the task force parameters. If the name of the task force does not begin with a capitalized term—in other words, where the name would be lowercase if it were not a page title (e.g. "military aviation" or "maritime warfare")—an altname= parameter containing the lowercased version of the name must be passed to {{Film/Task force categories}}.
      {{!}}-
      {{#ifeq:{{{Fooish-task-force|}}}|yes|
      {{!}} style="width: {{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|28px|43px}};" {{!}} [[Image:Fooimage.png|{{#ifeq:{{{small|}}}|yes|28x20px|43x30px}}|center]]
      {{!}} [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Fooish cinema task force|Fooish cinema task force]]<includeonly>{{Film/Task force categories|name=French cinema|class={{{class|}}}|importance={{{importance|}}}}}</includeonly>
      }}
    3. Add {{{Fooish-task-force|}}} to the appropriate conditional statements in the template.
    4. Update the project banner instructions:
      1. Add "|Fooish-task-force=" to the example syntax, in correct position among the task force parameters.
      2. Add "* '''Fooish-task-force''' – "''yes''" if the article is supported by the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Fooish cinema task force|Fooish cinema task force]]." to the instructions, in correct position among the task force parameters.
  3. Set up the task force assessment infrastructure:
    1. Create the main task force category (Category:Fooish cinema task force articles) with {{WPFILMS Task force category|Fooish cinema}} as the content.
    2. Create the main task force assessment category (Category:Fooish cinema articles by quality) with {{WPFILMS Task force assessment category|Fooish cinema}} as the content.
    3. Create the assessment level sub-categories:
      1. Category:FA-Class Fooish cinema articles with {{WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|Fooish cinema|FA}} as the content.
      2. Category:FL-Class Fooish cinema articles with {{WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|Fooish cinema|FL}} as the content.
      3. Category:A-Class Fooish cinema articles with {{WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|Fooish cinema|A}} as the content.
      4. Category:GA-Class Fooish cinema articles with {{WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|Fooish cinema|GA}} as the content.
      5. Category:B-Class Fooish cinema articles with {{WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|Fooish cinema|B}} as the content.
      6. Category:Start-Class Fooish cinema articles with {{WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|Fooish cinema|Start}} as the content.
      7. Category:Stub-Class Fooish cinema articles with {{WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|Fooish cinema|Stub}} as the content.
      8. Category:List-Class Fooish cinema articles with {{WPFILMS Task force assessment level category|Fooish cinema|List}} as the content.
    4. Add the task force's statistics table ({{WPFILMS Task force assessment|Fooish cinema}}) to the task force statistics table in the assessment department.
  4. Set up the task force's open tasks listing:
    1. Create the task force's open task template ({{WPFILMS Announcements/Fooish cinema}}) using the syntax shown on {{WPFILMS Announcements/Task force}} as the content. At a minimum, the name= parameter must be set to "Fooish cinema"; optionally, some initial tasks should be located and added to the listing.
    2. Add the new template to the "Task force lists" section of {{WPFILMS Announcements}}; the column break should be moved, if necessary, to keep the two columns properly aligned.
  5. Set up the task force's userboxes:
    1. Create the task force userbox (Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Outreach/User WPFILMS Fooish cinema task force) with the following content, using the same image as was used in {{Film}} above:
      <div style="float: left; border:solid #C0C090 1px; margin: 1px;">
      {| cellspacing="0" style="width: 238px; background: #F8EABA;"
      |-
      | style="width: 45px; height: 45px; background: wheat; text-align: center; font-size: 14pt; color: black;" | [[Image:Fooish_image.png|45x45px]]
      | style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em; color: #000000;" | This user is a member of the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Fooish cinema task force|'''Fooish cinema task force''']] of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films|WikiProject Films]].
      |}</div>
    2. Add the following to the userbox listing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Outreach#User banners and userboxes, in proper order among the other task force userboxes:
      |-
      | <tt><nowiki>{{</nowiki>[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Outreach/User WPFILMS Fooish cinema task force]]<nowiki>}}</nowiki></tt>
      | {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Outreach/User WPFILMS Fooish cinema task force}}
  6. Add the task force to the project's navigation system:
    1. Add a link to the task force to the "Task forces" section of the main project page.
    2. Add a link to the task force to the appropriate task force section of {{WP Film Sidebar}}
  7. Announce the new task force:
    1. Add an announcement of the new task force page to the "Announcements" section of {{WPFILMS Announcements}}, and to the discussion of the task force proposal on the project's talk pages (if any).
    2. Add the task force to the "Films" section of the WikiProject directory; add cross-reference links to any other sections into which the task force falls.

Boilerplate and templates

mostly "Film"-ified...

Notes

Project issues

  • Weekly open task collab
  • explicit IMDb guideline
  • character notability clarification
  • class-specific advice in the banner for how to get to the next level
  • "medal of honor"-level award reserved for coordinators to confer (coordinators will not be eligible to receive while in office)
  • next election round approaching, do we need more coordinator spots?
  • expanding the style guidelines to cover a broader range of subjects, massaging them in preparation for formal MOS review
  • specific future film tasks
  • implementing core contest; creating a contest dept for this and other tasks
  • member questionnaire?
  • A-Class review, dealing with current A's

Discussion

Brief note

I apologize for having not formally addressed the new coordinators yet - other affairs online and offline have prevented this. I hope to have time later today and rectify this with a proper introduction and comprehensive report on where we stand, as well as some proposals for future initiatives.

I also am somewhat sorry that the 0.7 contest was created without prior consultation, but the imminent deadline of the 0.7 release version's publication forced my hand; plans were already in the cards to apply something similar to the core department over time, so this will afford us a test-run. Nehrams had also laid the groundwork of a review table to identify individual article problems - the contest is merely a logical extension to this work. Please do not view the quick release as an attempt to prevent critique, however - I am happy to discuss any changes either here or on the contest's talk page. Adjustments made mid-stream are not ideal, but in this particular case, we'll have to make that sacrifice if need be. Thanks, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 11:36, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work, it looks much better than it was before. I think we still need a section for the revisions, since we need to determine those by October 20th. If there are people that are improving the articles before then that should be fine, and we can start choosing revisions just a few days before the deadline. I believe we should see a lot of progress in the coming months for these articles. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 18:46, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I actually didn't realize we needed to be ready that soon. Should we create some sort of additional incentive to get the editors to focus on tagged articles? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 18:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's why I was in such a hurry to try and set all of this up. I really don't know why they gave the projects only a month's notice, especially for the projects that had several hundred articles to cover. What did you have in mind for the additional incentive? --Nehrams2020 (talk) 02:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not really sure - which I guess is why I'm asking. Hmmm, Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 08:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess we could divert some of the awards for raising the classes to completing the revisions. Maybe use Tireless Contributor, Working Man, and Diligence barnstars but require a larger amount of revisions to be completed (first level could be 10-20). Whatever we can do to get people to help with the revisions will really help out for looking over the 200 articles. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 19:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive my confusion, but to what does the December 1 deadline refer, if the revisions that are going to be used need to be selected by October 20? Steve T • C 19:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The December 1st deadline is just an indicator of how far the articles have improved in a few months (we probably didn't want to drag out this drive over a year, so three months away seemed like a reasonable ending point). However, based on the success of the drive, we may likely do similar drives, especially for our other core articles. Finding the revision is a separate thing then improving the articles (although if the articles improve before the October 20th deadline, we will have better revisions to provide for the 0.7 release). --Nehrams2020 (talk) 19:53, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That does clarify matters. The current wording at the 0.7 contest page ("...before the scheduled publication of Wikipedia 0.7 currently set for December 2008") makes it sound as if we have until then to improve/tag revisions of these articles for 0.7, when October 20 is the cutoff and December just an arbitrary end to the improvement drive. Thanks. As for incentives, does Wikipedia still frown upon cash rewards? :) Steve T • C 21:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Steve, you may want to check out WP:REWARD. Not sure if that is anything we can formalize... I don't quite have the budget to persuade editors to improve some articles. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:44, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question As one of the new coordinators, I should ask: what else should we be focusing on for our coordinator duties? Thanks. Ecoleetage (talk) 21:12, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for my lack of promptness, which I hope to emend shortly after I return from a work commitment. This will be clarified, I promise. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:41, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Topic workshop

I've been working on a draft of the topic workshop I made for WP:ANIME and adapting it for WP:FILM, and am nearly done. Any commentary on the workshop itself before I finish it and set into motion? Basically, the general idea is that you have a centralized place to propose topics, and they can receive input from the community, as well as garner more visibility and help. — sephiroth bcr (converse) 22:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a terrific start! My only major concern about the effectiveness of this topic workshop is that, well, it's really hard to get a group of articles under a topic up to Good Article status. Film series seem to be the only plausible approaches. I was also wondering about something -- you mention that any upcoming film article is inherently unstable (which I agree with), so if there was a topic related to an actor or a director, would an article about an upcoming film disrupt a featured topic? For example, my personal idea for a featured topic had been director Neil Marshall with Dog Soldiers, The Descent, and Doomsday, but if he began a fourth film, what happens? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 22:34, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me. I actually suggested to WikiProject Alien last week to link together multiple articles into a good topic, since there are already several film articles that are GA/FA status. I'm sure it would fall under our project as well. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:02, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would echo Erik's observation. Does it make sense to be proactive and suggest possible subjects for consideration? Or should we be reactive and see what suggestions flow in? Ecoleetage (talk) 00:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(To Erik) Yes, topics are hard to produce (I know, I've made three), but this is why we have a centralized place to work on them. And if there was an upcoming film, it would be "audited", meaning that the article would go through a peer review with exhaustive commentary that would address any problems with the article. This would qualify the article as part of the topic. This is done in cases of articles/lists that cannot become good articles or featured lists for whatever reason (television series that has not finished airing, film in production, video game that has not been released). And if you made a topic on Marshall and he made a fourth film, then you would be given about three months to bring the article up to snuff so it can be audited and included in the topic. After the film is released, you would have six months to improve the article to GA. I'm just saying the difficulty is in the updating that you have to do and the work involved in keeping the topic up-to-date. As for what types of topics, yeah, beyond film series and filmographies, the only other potential topics that come to mind are awards-related topics (I have one posited around the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film planned). That said, with the way the workshop is set up, people are free to suggest their ideas, and can receive input to see whether it is a viable topic or not. In this manner, we're not necessarily static in the form of topics we can create (although a majority will ultimately be series/filmographies or similar).
(To Eco) Both are intended. Anyone can propose topics, so we can propose a few and leave it open for everyone to contribute. IMO, filling it up with too many topics dilutes resources, but we definitely shouldn't feel hesistant about bringing ideas forward. — sephiroth bcr (converse) 07:51, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If I could propose a topic, I think we need get some serious editing on the films directed by Orson Welles. I've already done significant expansions on The Immortal Story and The Trial (1962 film), created a new article on The Dreamers (unfinished film), and I hope to sandblast the article on Macbeth (1948 film). I will probably do an expansion of Filming Othello, which I created as a stub some months ago. I've looked at articles on Welles' unfinished The Other Side of the Wind and his lost Too Much Johnson and both (I feel) are terribly written; the article on The Stranger (1946 film) could probably use expansion, too. For a filmmaker of Welles' significance, the level of scholarship on Wikipedia relating to his canon appears wobbly and often lacking. I wouldn't mind generating some sort of project-wide enthusiasm to clean up these articles. Ecoleetage (talk) 12:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another question as I consider possible featured topics... what about James Dean and his three films? He has been on stage and in television as well. Can the actor and the three films make up a featured topic or not? Just trying to understand the extent of the topic boundaries. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:53, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You define the scope of the topic at the start, and if you want it to be "Films James Dean acted in" (bad title, just a throwaway), then that's the scope you've set for yourself. Do note, however, that the main article has to establish a clear basis for a topic (aka, you can't cherry pick; for instance, "Films James Dean acted in before 1956", which would exclude Giant (film), is not appropriate). — sephiroth bcr (converse) 23:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Correction: Dean starred in three films, but he had small roles and bit parts in other flicks. That could be part of a James Dean happening here. Ecoleetage (talk) 12:54, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As an FYI, I just did a massive rewrite of Orson Welles' lost film Too Much Johnson. I am a bit surprised that the non-Kane Welles articles have been problematic. I will get to "Macbeth" later next week. Ecoleetage (talk) 16:45, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that articles like these are problematic because the topics do not stand out as much. I think that our base of editors at WikiProject Films is relatively young, and if you look at our spotlight, there's a lot of recent films that achieve some kind of status. In addition, for older films that may not be highlighted by the media as much, research may be harder to conduct. You can see the lack of content in the WikiProject's core list with all the Stub-class and Start-class articles. I've considered creating a resources subpage to address this... to both list possible resources and to provide a forum so people can request assistance in researching a topic. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A central area to point out possible resources for articles would be a great idea. It would allow other members who have access to university databases, libraries, member-only websites, museums, etc. to be able to assist in providing sources in improving article content. This could further improve our numbers in GAs/FAs if members knew where they could find more information for a particular article. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 17:31, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not certain about research problems for older films. There might be more of a comfort level in writing about more recent films versus a title from the 1930s. I believe Erik's idea of a list of resources is an excellent idea, since I find myself returning to a select number of online sources for many of the articles I write and edit. Ecoleetage (talk) 19:07, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As an FYI, I wanted to see Wikipedia's coverage of the Orson Welles unfinished film version of "Don Quixote," which recently had its US DVD debut -- and there is no article on the subject. I am going to create one, as that void is fairly remarkable and needs to be filled. Ecoleetage (talk) 14:32, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Belated welcome

I apologize for not being able to make an introductory address to the new coordinators earlier - some unexpected offline commitments left me with too little time earlier to properly gather my thoughts and address you all with sufficient depth.

First of all - congratulations on being elected! I am deeply honored to be working with each of you, and I'm very pleased to see that we've yielded such a strong field of coordinators, all of whom I am familiar with as regular, thoughtful contributors to our endeavors. Perhaps the proof in the pudding is that you've already gotten off to a strong start, as the discussions already begun here clearly evidence! :) This is also, of course, something our expansion has helped facilitate, and I look forward to seeing the coordinator talk page truly becoming a place of collaboration, brainstorming, and initiative-taking.

Let me get a few of the sterner items of the agenda out of the way first:

  1. All coordinators must have this page added to their watchlist if they haven't already. We shouldn't have to be calling for you, and your self-nomination presumes that you want to be regularly involved here, so please do make it easier by keeping your eye on the discussions. (Contributing regularly wouldn't hurt either! ;)
  2. One of the responsibilities we've formally incorporated into the position starting with this term is that all coordinators are expected to perform a regular amount of service in the Review department reviewing items which appear there. The highest prior items are the A-Class reviews - this is because they not only require a minimum of three support votes, but also because coordinators are formally written into that review process to administer to it. This is particularly relevant at the moment, as we have three articles in review, one of which has been drawn out far too long - and we are all responsible for this, myself included. The A-class reviews must be processed faster, in order to keep them a useful option. The second priority is reviewing any items which have no garnered any critiques yet. Beyond that, just keeping your hand in is still important, as it keeps coordinators up-to-date on what deficiencies we're seeing in articles, and how we can address them ahead of time. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New business

Tag and Assess drive

This project has not yet undergone a Tag and Assess drive, which is quite unusual for a WikiProject of this size. Is this warranted at the moment? If so, how shall we proceed, and is anyone interested in organizing it? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Task force coordination

Would it be advisable for task forces to be directly under the purview of one or two coordinators each? This would give the task forces direct points-of-contact for any issues they need assistance with, and also allow the coordinators to regularly evaluate their needs and suggest common solutions here as need be. I also think that this may be crucial for upcoming tasks that we really need to finally get around to, such as style guidelines for articles that aren't about individual films, as well as assessment standards for those articles, notability and naming guidelines, and specialized infoboxes. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Organizations task force

I'd like to create a task force to cover articles on Organizations, Schools, Institutions, Companies, etc. Much of this is currently tagged under the Filmmaking task force (although not all are), and it seems to actually be more appropriate to group these together, as they will have a more common structure and content. This could also be a joint task force with other relevant WikiProjects such as WikiProject Companies and WikiProject Organizations. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

V0.7 revisions selection

This is urgently looming, since we have a deadline of October 20th, IIRC. Anyone interested in helping out with this will be greatly appreciated. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Old business

(Much of this is verbatim from the last time these were brought up.)

Questionnaire

Many of our editors - and by extension, the project - seem to get active in fits and starts, and in some of our key areas, such as assessment and reviews, go from moribund to busy back to moribund again without much rhyme or reason. Others, like CotW or Translation just died outright. I've been considering creating some new departments such as Contests and perhaps even a rotating open task (see below), but maybe it would be worth polling our members first to find out more about what drives their participation. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb guideline

Has the encyclopedia made it apparent enough that the IMDb is not a reliable source? It seems a common stumbling block for so many editors that they can't rely on the site, and yet there isn't much in the way of a formal declaration to the effect. Also, should this go into the style guidelines, be thrown to RS, or perhaps be elsewhere? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Character articles

Do characters who only appear significantly in one work actually justify independent articles? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If they have enough coverage to satisfy the general notability guideline, then I see no reason why they shouldn't have articles. How many serialized works is largely irrelevant in comparison to the notability the article asserts. You could have a character present in one media that is notable due to sufficient coverage and have a character present in five media that is not notable due to insufficient coverage. The only implication that appearances in several media conveys is that there is a greater possibility sources can be found to assert notability. — sephiroth bcr (converse) 05:42, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Future films updating

We've discussed adding additional parameters into the template to identify a Future-Class film's release date, so as to help automate re-assessment, especially for less-mainstream releases. This is also crucial since Future-class articles "go dark" on the assessment logs, which makes it difficult to track them otherwise. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Open tasks

Would it be worth exploring the option of having a weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly open task collaboration amongst the members? The regular shift in focus would break up the monotony, while only featured one at a time would also reduce the sense of being overwhelmed which members may otherwise feel if confronted with the full scope of remaining work. Additionally, we have recently overhauled the project banner to fully deprecate the separate "needs" banners into project banner parameters. Should this sort of task be split amongst members, or is it too admin-ish to spend their time on? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that Erik had proposed adding some additional "needs-X" parameters to the project banner. Additionally, Nehrams and I discussed expanding the "how to get the article to the next class" sub-templates to include more than the Stub and Start classes. And as per above, non-film articles will require these to be re-written for their type of content. (This can probably be handled in conjunction with specific task force parameters, such as Festivals, Awards, or Filmmaking.) Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contests

The contest department may be forthcoming, primarily in order to provide incentives for working on the Core articles. We could also provide general contests for general article improvement, as well as open task collaborations or other assessment drives. Thoughts on how to best run these are definitely wanted. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

The wiki-wide peer review overhaul seems to have optimized their reviews past what we can offer, and gives the benefit of more eyes on the PR. Is it worth us maintaining a wholly separate process, or should we just transclude the general PRs within the Review department PR section? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Style guidelines

The task forces which focus on film-related topics are in desperate need of their own style guidelines. Expansion of our MOS, infoboxes, templates, etc to standardize these articles is going to be a continuing concern and possible hindrance to their ability to create viable FAs without some guidance beyond the ad hoc. Identifying key members of these task forces also will help. Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other comments

Please feel free to address them here.

Again, I look forward to seeing everyone work together here, and I have very good feeling that we'll get a great deal accomplished! :) Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 05:10, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Michael_Hardy/Archive7&oldid=244720842"