Misplaced Pages

User talk:Ruud Koot

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ideogram (talk | contribs) at 09:53, 28 February 2012 (→Oh well ...: try again). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 09:53, 28 February 2012 by Ideogram (talk | contribs) (→Oh well ...: try again)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archive
Archives

template:Optimization algorithms

Hi Ruud!

(1) Thanks for providing some level of protection for the Eppstein article.

(2) Optimization algorithms template:

Some months ago, you were quite right to complain about the over-emphasis on continuous optimization in the optimization algorithms template. I revised the template last week, at least indicating that combinatorial optimization was a category at a high level. Perhaps you could list graph/network problems and algorithms?

Also, I added some references on combinatorial optimization to the main article on Mathematical optimization.

BTW, I saw that a new edition of Minoux/Gondran has material on biologically inspired methods. With its new hierarchical structure, there is a lot of room for more on heuristics.

It would be great if you could add collapsibility to the template.

Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:41, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll have a look at it tomorrow. Cheers, —Ruud 22:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
I started a graph/network section.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 02:34, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 January 2012



ERCIM

Dear Mr Ruud, with all the respect due to your obvious commitment for this great project that is wikipedia, I rarely saw such a mess ^^

10:04, 4 November 2011 Ruud Koot (talk | contribs) moved ERCIM to User:Ruud Koot/Computer science/ERCIM

As I'm not able to move it myself I asked their Misplaced Pages:Requested_moves/Current_discussions#January_4.2C_2012.

Best, Zorglub27 (talk) 23:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The article was deleted (Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/ERCIM). I moved it into my used space because I might be able to bring it up to standards at a later time. —Ruud 23:35, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

ouch, I just brought it back, all my apologies for the mistake but I really thought that it was unthinkable to find this article empty as the W3C article still have a link in direction of ERCIM :/ Shall I undo what I done? Zorglub27 (talk) 00:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Moved it back, don't worry ;) There was a message about the deletion discussion in the log, but I'm not sure if you could see that, as your not an administrator. The fact that there are incoming links to this article is a good reason for why I think there should be an article on this organization. Just have to convince a few other editors first. —Ruud 00:13, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks ^^ I would be glad to contribute to the new version if needed! Zorglub27 (talk) 00:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Changes to the edit-protected Template:MacTutor

Hi Ruud, I placed the {{edit protected}} template in the relevant template page, and wrote a brief description of the requested edits, their effects and the reason behind'em. Could you do the job? All the Best, Daniele.tampieri (talk) 21:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

CiteSeer

Hi, you replaced the more general cat "Bibliographic databases" with the more specific on "Bibliographic databases in computer science" in this edit. However, as far as I can see, CiteSeer covered much more than just computer science. As the more specific cat is included in the more general cat, it would seem to me that it does not need to be included in the specific one. Otherwise, each and every general database should be included in the category "Bibliographic databases in computer science", too. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 17:46, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

"Citeseerx is a scientific literature digital library and search engine that focuses primarily on the literature in computer and information science." (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/about/site) —Ruud 17:55, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
  • But it is the article on CiteSeer, not CiteSeerX that I am talking about. That one starts with saying that "CiteSeer was a public search engine and digital library for scientific and academic papers." (Implying that even social sciences and/or humanities were included). Is that incorrect? if so, it should be corrected. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 18:00, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
I used Citeseer and use CiteSeerX regularly and haven't seen them indexing anything beyond computer and information science, so our article would be incorrect. —Ruud 18:03, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
  • Ah, I just see that CSX redirects to CS. If CS was broader than CSX, perhaps both cats should remain and I was too hasty to remove the specific cat. The article is not very clear, though, because even the section on CSX talk all the time about "scientific and academic" papers. Computer science belongs in the sciences, not humanities/social sciences, so it would be clearer if that were specified and "academic" deleted throughout. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 18:06, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2012


Nomination for deletion of Template:PortalPage

Template:PortalPage has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Magioladitis (talk) 20:53, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Re:Dutch-to-English

Re:Dutch-to-English

I would be grateful if you could check quality of google translation (my understanding - National Bank of Belgium agreed to distribute images of the banknotes it has issued using the same rules as euro banknotes) - please reply on http://commons.wikimedia.org/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:BEL-500f-rev.jpg Bulwersator (talk) 06:49, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited First-class function, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Superclass (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) 12:32, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Qi (programming language) (2nd nomination)

Did you notice that a number of users rallied at an external mailing list have contributed to this discussion and carefully weighted the strengths of all arguments made? —Ruud 03:10, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Did you see my talk page FAQ? Specifically the second section. But yes, I did note that there was a number of new users, but there was not a consensus to delete taking all into account. Stifle (talk) 16:44, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

This Month in GLAM: January 2012


This Month in GLAM – Volume II, Issue I, January 2012

Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 20:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Strongly Connected Components Algorithm

The strong components algorithm discussed in "Cheriyan-Mehlhorn/Gabow algorithm" is actually due to Dijkstra. I discussed this in the Talk section of that article. My discussion was written in the form of several suggestions to the Editor. I don't know if this is you Ruud. But if it is you might want to check it out. Hal Gabow Hngabow (talk) 21:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I didn't write any of that article (except for changing the article title to disambiguate it from your shortest path algorithm, although admittedly I no longer remember why I chose the current name). I'll try to find some time to incorporate some of the comments you left on the talk page into the article. Of course you're also free to do so yourself. Regards, —Ruud 22:35, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate your help. I didn't change the page myself because I thought it would be better to have an impartial editor do it. I showed my Talk page addition to Joseph Cheriyan and Kurt Mehlhorn and they're both fine with it. I'd be happy to answer any questions that might arise in the editing process. I understand you won't be able to do this right off the bat. Thanks for your quick reply. hal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hngabow (talk • contribs) 23:49, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

RfD nomination of Wp; redirects

Hello, as you have participated in previous RfDs for the Wp; redirects, I'd like you to know that there is a renomination going on at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 February 3. Feel free to voice your opinion there. ZZArch  23:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ruud;cs

A tag has been placed on Ruud;cs, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to an article talk page, file description page, file talk page, MediaWiki page, MediaWiki talk page, category talk page, portal talk page, template talk page, help talk, user page, user talk or special page from the main/article space.

If you can fix the redirect to point to a mainspace page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you are fixing the redirect. If you think the redirect should be retained as is for some reason, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the article's talk page directly to give your reasons. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. DASHBot (talk) 18:03, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

The Signpost: 13 February 2012


MSU Interview

Dear Ruud Koot,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Misplaced Pages administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.


Sincerely,


Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 04:27, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at Tenberry Software

Hi Ruud Koot, you recently removed a deletion tag from Tenberry Software. Because Misplaced Pages policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove speedy deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the tag. Although the deletion proposal may be incorrect, removing the tag is not the correct way for you to contest the deletion, even if you are more experienced than the nominator. Instead, please use the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. Remember to be patient, there is no harm in waiting for another experienced user to review the deletion and judge what the right course of action is. As you are involved, and therefore potentially biased, you should refrain from doing this yourself. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 17:25, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Glossaries on science

Category:Glossaries on science, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust, B.Ed. about my edits? 02:24, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Wizard (band)

Please do not remove prod tags unless you explain why. Ten Pound Hammer • 02:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

  • No need for the rudeness. Wizard (band) seemed fairly uncontroversial to me since it has no real assertation of notability. Please do not talk down to me like that as if I'm a clueles n00b because I'm not. I know when to prod and when not to prod — I prodded dozens of articles in the past month and only a couple were deprodded. I also didn't realize that prod removers are not required to explain, but I still think it's common courtesy to do so if you remove prod. Ten Pound Hammer • 17:02, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Ruud Koot. You have new messages at Alpha Quadrant's talk page.
Message added 02:07, 18 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 02:07, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Web 3.0

Hi, there's a request for this redirect to be unprotected at Talk:Web_3.0#Unprotect_and_split. Since you were the protecting admin, could you have a look please? Tra (Talk) 23:02, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

WP:COMPSCI direction

Hi, I would like to discuss with you where you see WP:COMPSCI going. I think I should understand this before contributing in this area. Feel free to reply here or on my talk page. Thanks, Ideogram (talk) 12:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

If you are referring to the restructuring proposals. I'd like to reduce the number of computing-related WikiProjects to approxiately two. WikiProject Computer science focussing on computer science in its broadest academic sense, including many aspects of computer programming, and WikiProject Computing on all practical aspects of computing (including e.g. everything currently covered by WikiProject Software). —Ruud 13:00, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
OK in general what do you think needs to be done next? As you know Misplaced Pages is always a work in progress. I'm assessing a lot of articles and I hope we can agree on some guidelines to deal with the current situation, which I expect will continue for some time.
I also have a specific concern, which is I don't think that maths subjects with applications to CS should be tagged WP:COMPSCI, that would be like tagging Calculus as part of Physics. Thanks, Ideogram (talk) 13:47, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Apart from the issue with WikiProject Databases, I'm not really sure you mean with "the current situation"? What should be done next? Write more articles and tag the current ones, I guess?
Regarding mathematical articles, for articles concerning "basic" mathematics like arithmetic or group theory, I would agree these should not be tagged with WP:COMPSCI. For more specialist articles in logic and discrete mathematics, I'd say these should be tagged with WP:COMPSCI as well. Many of those are primarily of interest to computer scientist (e.g. CTL) or at least use papers from computer science journals as their references (e.g. Hadwiger conjecture (graph theory)) . —Ruud 17:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can tell every article tagged WPDATABASE is included in WP:COMPSCI. I don't think this is a good idea. What can be done about this? Ideogram (talk) 23:13, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

As discussed at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Databases#Restructure proposal, we would have to implement one of the proposals at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Databases#Restructure proposals. This would require assessing/retagging ~600 articles (more without the assistance of a bot). I think User:Pnm preferred Option 1, listed there. You might want to discuss this with him. —Ruud 23:26, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and we still haven't figured out what to do with all the articles like C-SPAN Video Library, which would probably need to be sorted out first too. —Ruud 23:28, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

Oh well ...

Apparently you do not value my participation. Ideogram (talk) 09:36, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Let me try this again. Apparently you are trying to enforce a hard limit of 100 Top-importance CS articles. I have a couple objections. First, I was not done sorting through the articles, I was going to add candidates first and then prune down. Second, if you will please note there are several articles from WPDATABASE in this category e.g. Column (database), not all of which belong here, which is the issue I raised with you above.

I'm sure you find me annoying, but we are going to need to communicate if I'm going to work in this area. If you feel that is too much trouble, then of course I will find something else to work on. Ideogram (talk) 09:53, 28 February 2012 (UTC)