| Revision as of 09:42, 12 December 2012 editMathsci (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers66,107 edits →FYI← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:01, 12 December 2012 edit undoCoroner's jury (talk | contribs)39 edits →FYI: replying here as I am unable to respond properlyNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| Please see ]. Thanks, ] (]) 09:42, 12 December 2012 (UTC) | Please see ]. Thanks, ] (]) 09:42, 12 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :It seems that for some reason I am unable to edit that page and answer these allegations, so I will have to do so here. | |||
| ::] | |||
| :Having said which, I can speak only for my own edits and am very surprised indeed that rather than answering serious questions about mathematics you prefer to attack me personally and in a forum where I am unable to respond. | |||
| :*''misunderstanding of the words "schlicht" and "invariant"'' — No. I pointed out that they are not synonymous and being used as if they were. We are in agreement about their usage on the unit disc which is the domain in question. Your statement is incorrect | |||
| :*''little more than trolling'' — what on earh do you mean? Why is adding new references trolling? Why is improving existing references of an article trolling? Why is clarifying the wording trolling? Why is improving redirects trolling? Why is pointing out an undefined notation trolling? You yourself accepted the point and corrected the article in line with my suggestion ! Were you trolling too? I challenge you to point to a single one of my edits and explain why it does not improve the encyclopedia. | |||
| :Rather than face the fact that you were wrong, and on an utterly unimportant point too, about the use of the term invariant, you launched an attack on me to give yourself an excuse to remove or denigrate the posts in which I showed you up. Shame on you. ] (]) 10:01, 12 December 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 10:01, 12 December 2012
Coroner's jury, you are invited to the Teahouse
| [REDACTED] |
Hi Coroner's jury! Thanks for contributing to Misplaced Pages. |
FYI
Please see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Echigo mole. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 09:42, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
- It seems that for some reason I am unable to edit that page and answer these allegations, so I will have to do so here.
- Having said which, I can speak only for my own edits and am very surprised indeed that rather than answering serious questions about mathematics you prefer to attack me personally and in a forum where I am unable to respond.
- misunderstanding of the words "schlicht" and "invariant" — No. I pointed out that they are not synonymous and being used as if they were. We are in agreement about their usage on the unit disc which is the domain in question. Your statement is incorrect
- little more than trolling — what on earh do you mean? Why is adding new references trolling? Why is improving existing references of an article trolling? Why is clarifying the wording trolling? Why is improving redirects trolling? Why is pointing out an undefined notation trolling? You yourself accepted the point and corrected the article in line with my suggestion ! Were you trolling too? I challenge you to point to a single one of my edits and explain why it does not improve the encyclopedia.
- Rather than face the fact that you were wrong, and on an utterly unimportant point too, about the use of the term invariant, you launched an attack on me to give yourself an excuse to remove or denigrate the posts in which I showed you up. Shame on you. Coroner's jury (talk) 10:01, 12 December 2012 (UTC)