Revision as of 19:01, 9 January 2008 editMathsci (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers66,107 edits →Oh really← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:34, 10 January 2008 edit undoSlrubenstein (talk | contribs)30,655 edits →possible sock: new sectionNext edit → | ||
Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
:You appear not to have read the talk pages at all and also seem to have no intellectual grasp of the subject. Your edit summaries show a fundamental misconception concering psychometric tests. The consensus on the talk page was that '''all edits''' should be discussed there. You seem to be an edit warrior and, judging by the comments on your own talk page about the French, seem to have racist tendencies. Please read the talk page of ] more carefully. Continued edit warring will probably result in the page being blocked yet again from editing by the administrator MoonRiddenGirl, due to the return of a non-productive atmosphere. ] (]) 19:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC) | :You appear not to have read the talk pages at all and also seem to have no intellectual grasp of the subject. Your edit summaries show a fundamental misconception concering psychometric tests. The consensus on the talk page was that '''all edits''' should be discussed there. You seem to be an edit warrior and, judging by the comments on your own talk page about the French, seem to have racist tendencies. Please read the talk page of ] more carefully. Continued edit warring will probably result in the page being blocked yet again from editing by the administrator MoonRiddenGirl, due to the return of a non-productive atmosphere. ] (]) 19:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC) | ||
== possible sock == | |||
I wouldn't bre surprised - some edits seem deliberately trollish. Here is what you need to do: put together a sample of edits of his that are VERY similar to edits by MortizB. Indicate when MB was banned and when this guy started editing. The request a checkuser, it is the only way to be sure. ] | ] 13:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:34, 10 January 2008
Duplicate images uploaded
Thanks for uploading Image:Atlante-Aix-license.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Atlante-Aix.jpg. The copy called Image:Atlante-Aix.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.
This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Misplaced Pages's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot (talk) 14:14, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Better source request for Image:Marche-Richelme-Aix.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Marche-Richelme-Aix.jpg. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talkpage. Thank you. Rettetast 20:39, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- I forgot to click the link, as you might have guessed. It's quickly fixed. Why use so many words? --Mathsci 20:49, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- P.S. I worked out for myself that CC Attribution and CC Attribution-ShareAlike licenses are what is required for flickr images. Mathsci 21:03, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- Just a standard template when doing new image patrol to save time. Great that you found so many images you could use. A tip; you can upload flickr images easily by using this link. All you need is the flickr url and a bot does all the work. Rettetast 17:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Many thanks for the link. I will feel less like a BOT next time. :-) Mathsci (talk) 17:48, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Just a standard template when doing new image patrol to save time. Great that you found so many images you could use. A tip; you can upload flickr images easily by using this link. All you need is the flickr url and a bot does all the work. Rettetast 17:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- P.S. I worked out for myself that CC Attribution and CC Attribution-ShareAlike licenses are what is required for flickr images. Mathsci 21:03, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
Index n+1 free subgroup of rank n in free group of rank 2
Howdy, how do you show that a free group of rank 2 has a free subgroup of rank n and index n+1? JackSchmidt (talk) 13:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- The reference is on the free group page or in page 43 of the French edition of Serre's book on trees or on page 104 of Magnus, Karrass and Solitar (Schreier's theorem). The method in Serre cited on the WP page uses group actions on trees. The numbers I put down have not yet been checked properly, and in fact - as you doubtless noticed - it should be n-1 not n+1. Thanks for pointing out the slip: I hope all is OK now. --Mathsci (talk) 14:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for such a quick response! You've turned a stub into a nice article in under a day from its creation. JackSchmidt (talk) 14:11, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Citation templates
If you want {{harv}}
to link to the references, you need to use the {{citation}}
template rather than {{cite book}}
etc. (This is probably a bug.) Conversion is easy: you just change "cite ****" to "citation", and
use "first" and "last" parameters instead of "author". R.e.b. (talk) 18:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Arbcom Questions
I noticed that you voted in an Arbitration Committee election without elaborating on your question to said candidate . It's not too late, I think many are curious. HydroMagi 05:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- I have now provided the http link to the relevant section of his seventh archive. Mathsci 06:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Response to your comments
Please visit here as I have some questions and comments for you. Thanks! :bloodofox: (talk) 09:53, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I have replied there. --Mathsci (talk) 11:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hey Mathcsi, I have responded to the rest of the diffs I wasn't able to do so before here. :bloodofox: (talk) 08:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- I just noticed. Many thanks, Mathsci (talk) 08:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hey Mathcsi, I have responded to the rest of the diffs I wasn't able to do so before here. :bloodofox: (talk) 08:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Europe
Well, we seem to have ironed out the history section to excellent quality. Which section should we turn our attention to next? --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 18:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- My only thought is that a timeline or chronology of European history like this might be quite useful and interesting on WP, if someone had a suitable source. I couldn't find anything on WP that does this at present. Mathsci (talk) 09:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, might be handy. But would that go better in History of Europe? I think our history section's fairly comprehensive and I don't want to get into giving it too much weight over other sections of the article. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 17:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I meant a completely separate article giving the timeline. Mathsci (talk) 17:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ohhhh! Okay, that sounds better. If you get it started I'd be happy to help. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 17:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I would first have to find one or two published first approximations, which I don't have at present. In the near future, it is not clear what I can do, as at this time of year I usually migrate westwards and after that back to one of the larger islands in Europe where I will teach for a term (a course slightly related to some of my recent mathematical WP contributions). A more realistic current project is a rewrite of Andromaque which I may even see in Marseille. Sorry not to be more help at present. Mathsci (talk) 18:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- No worries. :) Thanks for your help with the history section; I'll try to find sources on other sections in Europe such as Economy or Religion but I might not have a chance to do much of anything substantiative for a month at the least. Safe travels! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 18:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I would first have to find one or two published first approximations, which I don't have at present. In the near future, it is not clear what I can do, as at this time of year I usually migrate westwards and after that back to one of the larger islands in Europe where I will teach for a term (a course slightly related to some of my recent mathematical WP contributions). A more realistic current project is a rewrite of Andromaque which I may even see in Marseille. Sorry not to be more help at present. Mathsci (talk) 18:10, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ohhhh! Okay, that sounds better. If you get it started I'd be happy to help. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 17:58, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I meant a completely separate article giving the timeline. Mathsci (talk) 17:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm, might be handy. But would that go better in History of Europe? I think our history section's fairly comprehensive and I don't want to get into giving it too much weight over other sections of the article. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 17:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Image tagging for Image:614px-Heawood graph.svg.png
Thanks for uploading Image:614px-Heawood graph.svg.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We requires this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Misplaced Pages, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 12:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Per request
Hello! Just wanted to let you know that I've provided the diffs that I believe you are looking for: . :bloodofox: (talk) 03:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- Many thanks. I have replied there. Mathsci (talk) 08:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Prime Numbers
Hi. I thought the removal of the trivia would be open-and-shut and uncontroversial, but as it's not I've put a section on the talkpage outlining my rationale. Happy to discuss any of the related minutæ with you! Lankiveil (talk) 14:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Not at all. It's been there for ages and, because it is trivia, is not subject to the same very exacting rules as the mathematics in the article. And it might also be there for feel good reasons (math phobia), since this is probably one of the most read introductory mathematics articles on the WP. BTW you should have posted to the talk page of prime number, not here. I will transfer your post and my answer to the Prime number page, where the discussion can be continued with other editors. Mathsci (talk) 15:11, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Editing R&I
Hi. Please revert your last change to R&I and discuss it first on the talk page. Although it is a minor change (which I support) it sets a bad precedent of making undiscussed changes. The benefit of the minor tweak outweighs the precedent. Thanks! --Kevin Murray (talk) 21:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hello, Kevin. I think it might be a good idea if you actually made a general statement about editing on the talk page of the article about the consensus on editing. I could not find anything. I think if you started a new section with such a statement, that would be helpful. Then in the spirit of that statement, you could revert my two words yourself, but not the three wikilinks which have all been discussed. Mathsci (talk) 22:13, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! --Kevin Murray (talk) 22
- 42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Twin Towns
Scotland is part of the United Kingdom. Misplaced Pages should reflect that rather than French ignorance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.179.79.215 (talk) 14:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Oh really
I have read the talk page extenisivly. The changes I made are extemely minor and merely intend to make the lede conform to the english language. And what are these "remarks" I have made! Lobojo (talk) 18:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
- You appear not to have read the talk pages at all and also seem to have no intellectual grasp of the subject. Your edit summaries show a fundamental misconception concering psychometric tests. The consensus on the talk page was that all edits should be discussed there. You seem to be an edit warrior and, judging by the comments on your own talk page about the French, seem to have racist tendencies. Please read the talk page of Race and Intelligence more carefully. Continued edit warring will probably result in the page being blocked yet again from editing by the administrator MoonRiddenGirl, due to the return of a non-productive atmosphere. Mathsci (talk) 19:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
possible sock
I wouldn't bre surprised - some edits seem deliberately trollish. Here is what you need to do: put together a sample of edits of his that are VERY similar to edits by MortizB. Indicate when MB was banned and when this guy started editing. The request a checkuser, it is the only way to be sure. Slrubenstein | Talk 13:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)