Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:58, 29 May 2018

Wikaviani, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Wikaviani! Thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Misplaced Pages and get help from experienced editors like Mz7 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 20:03, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, i'll do that with pleasure.

Speedy deletion nomination of Medo-Babylonian war against Assyrian Empire

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Medo-Babylonian war against Assyrian Empire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Misplaced Pages:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:41, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

September 2017

Hello, I'm Shellwood. I noticed that in this edit to Medo-Babylonian war against Assyrian Empire, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Misplaced Pages with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Shellwood (talk) 13:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, this removed content is one of my previous edits, but i failed inserting an infobox correctly, so i deleted my previous attempt to try again... Thanks for your comment. Wikaviani (talk) 13:11, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (Bradly Sinden) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Bradly Sinden, Wikaviani!

Misplaced Pages editor Animalparty just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please add appropriate categories and stub templates for such very short articles, e.g. {{UK-martialart-bio-stub}}.

To reply, leave a comment on Animalparty's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

--Animalparty! (talk) 01:50, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mahammad Mammadov

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Mahammad Mammadov requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. KylieTastic (talk) 16:08, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Morteza Rostami, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Iranian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:15, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

My bafflement

• Here is the first of the pieces of text from your comments which puzzled me:

"You say Dallal is not a mathematician, but Robertson and O'Connor are prominent mathematicians, do you think they misread Rashed too ???"

This is obviously not a statement, but it does look to me very much like a rhetorical question, carrying an implication that if what I said about Dallal were correct, I should logically hold the same opinion about O'Connor and Robertson. That doesn't follow, because, unlike Dallal, they have nowhere—as far as I'm aware—committed the error of mischaracterising algebraic geometry as "the study of curves by means of equations".

David Wilson (talk · cont) 12:21, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@David J Wilson: Hi David,

First of all, thanks for your message.

Actually, it seems that we have a point of disagreement here. According to me, the study of curves by means of equations is a part of algebraic geometry but since it's not the only one, it can not be used to characterize this field.

As you said on the Sharaf al-Din al-Tusi's talk page, Robertson and O'Connor are in agreement with Rashed when he writes"...it represents an essential contribution to another algebra which aimed to study curves by means of equations, thus inaugurating the beginning of algebraic geometry".

Since the study of curves by means of equations inaugurates the begnning of algebraic geometry, then this study is part of this field.

To support my above statement, here's how St Andrews defines algebraic geometry:

http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Glossary/algebraic_geometry.html

"Algebraic geometry studies curves, surfaces and their higher dimensional equivalents defined by systems of polynomial equations and relates their properties to the algebraic properties of the polynomial rings that they determine"

While of course, this definition includes modern notions, the first part clearly states that this field studies curves (geometry) defined by systems of polynomial equations (algebra).

Since you have nicely contributed to the article on Sharaf al-Din al-Tusi with a detailed description of his work in mathematics, i assume you have some knowledge in this area so that you can easily understand the definition given above.

English is not my mother tongue, however, i hope to have been clear...

Wikaviani (talk) 17:25, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I was a professional mathematician for 40 years (now retired). While I certainly cannot claim to be an expert on algebraic geometry, I have attended an informal course on the subject conducted by one of my former colleagues. One of the books normally sitting on my bookshelf, but now lying next to me as I write, is Miles Reid's Undergraduate Algebraic Geometry.

Above you write:

"Actually, it seems that we have a point of disagreement here. According to me, the study of curves by means of equations is a part of algebraic geometry but since it's not the only one, it can not be used to characterize this field."

I'm not sure I've understood this correctly. When you write "According to me, ...", are you referring to yourself? Since the sentence is not enclosed in quotation marks, that is the natural way to read it, and the way I initially read it, with some puzzlement, because if that is your position, then on this point it would seem to me that we're in furious agreement. I refer you to a very similar statement I made on the talk page of the article on Sharaf al-Din al-Tusi:

"To clarify this, algebraic geometry most certainly is not "the study of curves by means of equations", as two of your sources have mischaracterised it. While the study of curves by means of equations is one essential ingredient of algebraic geometry it is not the only one, and does not, by itself, constitute doing algebraic geometry."

It later occurred to me that when you wrote "According to me, ...", you might have been trying to restate my position—which it is—as something you disagreed with. Please let me know if that is the case, and I will further clarify why I hold that position.

As for the rest of what you have written above, I see nothing there that I would disagree with.

David Wilson (talk · cont) 23:13, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

I am not an expert in algebraic geometry either (my PhD was on stochastic calculus, Itô's formula with generalized Hurst exponent and generalized heat equation to non-integer derivation orders...) so that what i said you above is effectively my opinion and what i remember from my university courses. To make it simple, studying curves by means of equations implies doing algebraic geometry BUT doing algebraic geometry does not necessarily imply studying curves by means of equations (in other words, a cat is a feline but a feline is not necessarily a cat...). This is why i gave you the example of Euclid and geometry on Sharaf al-Din al-Tusi's talk page. If you agree with what i wrote just above, then we don't have any disagreement on this point. Wikaviani (talk) 14:39, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Wikaviani. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: 2nd Harran (May 9)

We should call a battle by what sources call it, and if sources don't ever call it by any name, that raises some questions about how significant a given battle was.

Are you taking a specific incident, a 609 BCE attack on the Medes in Harran, and assigning it a name of your own creation?

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:2nd Harran and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Misplaced Pages's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:2nd Harran, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Misplaced Pages's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Hi, i have other sources for this : , i quote, page 192 : "But in 610 Median and Babylonian troops drove Ashur-uballit away from Harran, and, after a failed attempt in 609 to reconquer the city with Egyptian help he disappeared from the scene. The Assyrian state had finally ceased to exist."

This battle is not given a name, so that i generically called the draft "2nd Harran" to distiguish it from the fall of Harran the previous year. Since it ended the Assyrian state, thi battle seems to have been a major engagement but the lack of sources is due to the fact that Assyrian annals record no more after 610 BC. With more time i may find more reliable sources for this battle or just include a quote about it in the Medo-Babylonian war against Assyrian Empire. Best regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 05:20, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

@MatthewVanitas: I added 3 other sources for the draft. Your opinion would be welcome. If this submission is accepted, i will further expand the article. Best regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 11:19, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Template:People of Khorasan

Hi, you seem to have contributing to Iran-related pages, and I am wondering if you can share your views in this voting. The Template:People of Khorasan has been tagged by someone for deletion. I have challenged the decision here. The discussion is open for voting. Can you please give your views in this page? Thanks --Cabolitæ (talk) 15:50, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Siege of Harran has been accepted

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Misplaced Pages. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Misplaced Pages!

Use Twinkle

Hey, I saw your reverts on Avicenna. Misplaced Pages:Twinkle makes reverting process much easier. Use it. --Wario-Man (talk) 21:57, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Wario-Man, thanks for letting me know about this, but i confess that i don't know very well many of wikipedia tools and it will take a moment before i find the time to understand them well enough to use them. Best regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 22:58, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Well, if you need any help or have questions, feel free to contact me via my talk page. Good luck! --Wario-Man (talk) 06:26, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much Wario-Man, i activated Twinkle thanks to your link and this gadget seems great for fighting disruptive edits (gives you some Rollback tool for that, which is very easy to use).---Wikaviani (talk) 15:43, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome. --Wario-Man (talk) 18:17, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Nineveh (612 BC), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Battle of Nineveh and Mede (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:14, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Issue solved, thanks !---Wikaviani (talk) 22:07, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Binomial theorem

Please note that there were no “first” claims in my revision at all – it said “probably contributed” (the same phrase used by Struik). Most “first” claims tend to be high-flown panegyric. As I understand it, based on direct evidence, Karaji did it up to the fourth degree. It took another 100-150 years for al-Samawal to ascribe to Karaji a way of generating the triangle of coefficients. Khayyam claimed to have personally discovered the law for the expansion (presumably the binomial theorem). His work predates al-Samawal's publication. Since neither Khayyam's nor Karaji's books have been recovered, any definite conclusions about the extent of their works are conjectural. --Telementor (talk) 07:42, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Telementor, thanks for your message. My edit had several reasons. First, according to Katz and Rashed, Al-Karaji stated the theorem (for the first time) : Victor J. Katz and Karen Hunger Parshall : "However, algebra advanced in other respects. Around 1000, al-Karaji stated the binomial theorem" and The developpement of Arabic Mathematics : Between Arithmetic and Algebra - R. Rashed, Page 63. More, even if Al-Karaji's version was stated for a fixed explicit exponent, his method allowed to expand this to a random exponent (he used a form of mathematical induction to prove his result, and as far as i know, he made it for a greater exponent than four). Finally, as i said in my edit summary, i was not able to find a quote in your source about a (hypothetical) contribution of Khayyam to this theorem. Best regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 21:47, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 23

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Neo-Babylonian Empire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Battle of Nineveh

Tahirid dynasty (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Khorasan

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Al-Biruni‎

Biruni's background was discussed on talk page several times. Biruni's native language was Khwarezmian. If you read Talk:Al-Biruni#Consensus_for_the_lead_section:_older_revision_(his_ethnicity), you will see why we changed Persian to Iranian. --Wario-Man (talk) 08:05, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Wario-Man, you're completely right. As you can see, first i reverted the IP, but since they said that "Persian" was in the sources, i self-reverted and appologized. After that, i thought a little more about that and i decided to write "Iranian" beacause being Persian implies being Iranian while being Iranian does necessarily mean being Persian. Therefore i wanted to change it again in the article but you made it first and i thank you for that. Best regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 09:14, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

It was Persian-Khwarezmian or Khwarezmian-Persian before our changes. If you read Iranica article, his background was related to Afrighids (non-Persian Iranian dynasty). Calling him Persian is not 100% wrong because he was related to Persian culture but it's not accurate per our sources. It's better to look at talk page and its archive when you are dealing with topics like this. It will give you a good image of article revision history. --Wario-Man (talk) 09:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, i usually look at the talk pages, but as you can see, that edit was my last one yesterday and i had not enough time to read the talk page, this was my mistake. Best regards.---Wikaviani (talk) 09:59, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Interfering with comments posted by other editors on talk pages

I draw your attention to the first paragraph of WP:TALKO and advise you that if you violate this policy again, you will be reported. --Juicy Oranges (talk) 18:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)