Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

Summary: Our Initiatives are starting to be developed - please get involved! In this newsletter, we also announce the results and prizes for Wikipedia Loves Art, and we bring you the latest on our Charity status application, in addition to our regular features on Other Chapters' Activities, recent Press Coverage and recent and upcoming Meet-ups.

In this month's newsletter:

1. Initiatives
2. Wikipedia Loves Art prizes
3. Charity status update
4. Other Chapters' Activities
5. Press Coverage
6. Meet-ups

Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.

Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 08:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help! I still need to work on the page more just getting used to Wiki right now.Gsmith53515 (talk) 18:28, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that you were right that editing others comments is frowned upon. I want you to understand that I was simply tyring to help. The OP posed a rather technical question and I thought that more links would make the question more accessable. It seems that my attempts to help over stepped the mark. Thank you for pointing that out. I wish you all the best. ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 23:02, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Summary: This month, our Initiatives Director explains our Initiatives, we update you on our Membership (including some new benefits for members!), keep you informed on our Charity Status application, and update you with our regular sections regarding Other Chapters' Activities, Press Coverage, and UK Meet-ups!

In this month's newsletter:

1. Initiatives
2. Membership
3. Charity status update
4. Other Chapters' Activities
5. Press Coverage
6. Meet-ups

Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL.

Delivered by Mike Peel (talk) 12:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Algebraist - Thank you for informing me of your request to delete David Cook (line of succession). The reason that you gave for deletion - "no sources" - would have been valid, if it were true. However, it was not true. The source was very clearly stated at the bottom of the article, under the heading "Reference". The fact that the basis for deletion was not actually true voids the whole discussion. The other issue raised - that of "notability" - is a red herring. "Notable" is nothing but Wikipedia code for, "I don't find this interesting," and as such has no value as an argument. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and so, by definition, all-encompassing. Subject matter which is considered uninteresting by any reader may simply be ignored by that reader. -- Oliver P. (talk) 00:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was your revert of the rule of inference article based on your evaluation of the content or the process? I presume you read what you reverted. Is it your belief that its not the case that "Every valid rule of inference is put forward as a logical truth and every logical truth can serve as a valid rule of inference" as supported by the leading expert on the subject? I am quite puzzled by this behavior.Pontiff Greg Bard (talk) 19:55, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As you are well aware, the place to discuss the content of an article is on that article's talk page. Algebraist 19:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

algebraist, would you mind answer thw questions I put you on the Talk:Diagonalizable matrix page? and then revert your reversal? --Kjetil Halvorsen 16:14, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For helping me to solve the mystery of the double spaced text! Thanks! CTJF83 chat 19:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm taking your advice, and I'd like to ask: How doesn't it still exist?

You seem to be judging it on the size of it; tiny, but it isn't the size that matters. Its what the empire contains that matters, colonies. Surely you, british yourself (i think), would still like something to be proud of? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.98.162.226 (talk) 17:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We should judge whether something is an empire by whether reliable sources describe it as such. Do they? Algebraist 17:30, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even without research; did anyone ever say it ended? do we still have territory that can gain independance? Yes.

79.98.162.226 (talk) 17:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right, so you don't have reliable sources. Algebraist 18:04, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		For helping sort out the spers all the time. And 'coz your talk is too quiet :-)  Chzz  ►  00:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Algebraist, a few days ago you responded to a "helpme" posted on my talk page with several suggestions for formatting that I was having a problem with (and thanks again for that). One of your suggestion was to "escape" the closing square bracket character I couldn't get to display correctly, with the sequence ampersand-hatch-93-semicolon, which took care of the problem.

I'm not unfamiliar with this type of sequence and have had occasion to use it before years ago, but now my wetware memory fails, and I can neither think what the charset is called, nor am I finding a list of the available characters. About the only special character I've had occasion to use for a very long time is alt-255 to insert an FF, forcing an apparent "space" - I'm not even sure if this is part of the same "&#  ;" charset. (I'm old enough that I'm much more accustomed to working with DOS than with Windows, but have forgotten nearly everything I ever knew about it. (In fact, I'm old enough to still being resentful of DOS having taken over the world from CP/M, which had a much more intuitive set of commands.)) I wonder if you could point me to either a discussion or a full listing of these. Thanks very much for your help. Milkunderwood (talk) 16:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Character encodings in HTML#HTML character references. Algebraist 16:29, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. Milkunderwood (talk) 17:42, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BRAVO! You are the king! Now this article looks nice. I hope you'll argee that the explanation of the Greek origin of the word "Nomocanon" should remain. I wish you well! :) Пера ложач (talk) 04:32, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that you'll agree with me that this article is just fine now. C U on Wikipedia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Пера ложач (talk • contribs) 05:29, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zakonopravilo is the original article with the original title of this legal act, and both articles have the same text and description. The articles "St. Sava's Nomocanon" and "Sava Nomocanon" have been redirected to Zakonopravilo. Please, redirect article "Nomocanon" to "Zakonopravilo". Thank you for understanding. Пера ложач (talk) 06:51, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had asked some admins on the IRC and raised an issue at WP:UAA who think that such name is perfectly within bounds. However, I think otherwise. So what is the "official" standpoint. --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 20:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure you can read the policy I pointed you to as well as I can. Algebraist 22:22, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not move pages to nonsensical titles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to learn more about moving pages, please see the guidelines on this subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Algebraist 10:36, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,

First, thanks for getting back to me. I posted the below in the new contributor questions page, but no one's answered it yet. Also, I am unable to connect to the IRC channel (is it down or is it me?), so:

Hey, I'd like to expand the parks section of Richmond,_va by including info on parks I've visited + pictures (I have a toddler, so I go to several Richmond and surrounding area parks each week). I would like to do this with other locations and things to do in Richmond. I guess the idea is just to get more information out to people; for instance, I often will mention a park or a thing to do in Richmond to someone who says he/she has lived here for 10 years or whatever, and the person has never heard of it. I've lived in several cities across the US, and this kind of thing always happens to me. Even with the internet, it is still often difficult to find out about the area you are looking in. Another example of the sort of thing I would like to add to city pages is the James river water levels (with a link to the NWS, of course). It is these kinds of things that take so long to figure out, but which are important parts of living in a city or area. So...one additional question I have is, would this kind of info be added to the same page, or should there be an additional page added like 'Things to do in Richmond, VA?

Originally, I was going to start my own wiki, but I figure that everyone already uses Wikipedia, and I love Wikipedia, so...;) Mattthehall (talk) 12:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Please reply on my talk...thanks!

Mattthehall (talk) 18:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason to change to British English on 2010 FIFA World Cup. The policy on Wikipedia is to leave international differences in the state it was after the article is past the stub stage unless there is a compelling national reason to change it. Since the subject is neither English nor American, it appears that it should stay. Please discuss on the article's talk page. The article itself is starting to load too slowly due to the multitude of edits so I would appreciate not entering an nationally-based edit war over this. For the record, I am Canadian and have never heard hosts used in this way. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:31, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help. I can work with what you have started. Probably, I'll just leave one side of the equation as computer code (Mathematica) and the other side of the equation as the "closed form" math you have started. Bridgettttttte_babble^poop 15:39, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More help, please. Font size and style is poor in these two equations - especially for the variables a and w. Can you help me fix it up?

• PseudoInverse[D] =

• where, D = Partition[Flatten[Tuples[Reverse[IdentityMatrix[a]],w]],(a*w)]

Bridgettttttte_babble^poop 09:32, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That TeX looks fine to me; a and w are displayed as variables normally are in mathematics. The code looks horrible, but code always looks horrible. How do you want them to look? Algebraist 09:53, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I note: 1) "a", "w", and "D" have different font types when set in code (by typing here) versus between <math> and </math>, and 2) "PseudoInverse[D] =" seems smaller and raised up compared to your TeX. Sorry to bug you, but this might be the only equation I ever edit. It seems like my problem has a lot to do with font and size of what I type as regular text so that it matches TeX. Thanks again. Bridgettttttte_babble^poop 11:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Standard practice for displaying variable names in HTML is to use italics. It looks nicer, and it goes better with the png display of TeX. As for the lineheight problem, the obvious solution is to TeX the whole thing, rather than just the right-hand side of it. Algebraist 21:07, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll try. Thanks. Bridgettttttte_babble^poop 09:16, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya - re our brief IRC chat re Go (game) and ELO rating system.

The European Go ratings website says that

"System description: The rating system is derived from ELO rating system used by International Chess Federation (FIDE)."

I think it may have only come in during the past year or 2, hence not in your book?

Anyway, glad to hear you enjoyed the game. (I'm sure an algebra-fan is being modest, saying it hurt his brain - lol.)

Regards, --Trafford09 (talk) 10:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier, you opposed adding a thin space as italics correction to the {{sic}} template because, as you stated, the version without was much better with your browser and settings. Here is another approach to doing the italics correction:

"unbeknownst to her, but knownst [sic] to us" (without correction);

"unbeknownst to her, but knownst [sic ] to us" (with correction).

More examples:

"its derivative f' vanishes at the origin" (without correction);

"its derivative f ' vanishes at the origin" (with correction).

"since (I + H)H⁻¹ = H⁻¹ + I, ..."  (without correction);

"since (I + H )H ⁻¹ = H ⁻¹ + I, ..." (with correction);

Could you tell me how their looks compare with your browser and settings?  --Lambiam 15:58, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[sic] looks better without the space, which makes it asymmetric. f' is probably better with, but that's quite close. (I + H)H⁻¹ = H⁻¹ + I is best without the space before the bracket but with the space before the ⁻¹. Algebraist 16:03, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So it's clearly very much dependent on the specifics of the rendering engine and settings. For me, all run together without correction (it's hard to see the f carries a prime) except for sic, but that one is quite asymmetric on my screen.  --Lambiam 16:51, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I started an article on the Pinched Torus. It would be nice if you might like to help me develop the article. It's an example of an orientable, compact 2-dimensional pseudo-manifold. It an example that turns up in intersection homology. I tried to calculate the homology groups and got

Does this look right to you? Where did one of the cycles go? (The Torus T has ) If you cut the punctured torus through the whole then you get a cone, and not a cylinder as you would with the torus. Is that why we lose a homology class? (A cylinder is a 2-chain, but a cone is not). — Fly by Night (talk) 18:53, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The pinched torus is homotopy equivalent to the wedge of a sphere and a circle (source here, page 11 and again on page 13), so your homotopy calculations are correct (this can also be seen more directly, of course). You lose a class in H₁ because a loop that goes round the torus "through the hole" (i.e. in the direction that doesn't require it to go through the pinch point) is the boundary of a cone with apex at the pinch. Loops in the other direction, that go through the pinch, remain nontrivial in homology. This can all be seen fairly directly if you compute the homology of the pinched torus via the Mayer–Vietoris sequence associated with the decomposition as a double-cone near the pinch and a cylinder. Algebraist 19:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I shall read the PDF that your sent. May I repeat my first appeal: "It would be nice if you might like to help me develop the article." Have a nice evening, and thanks again. — Fly by Night (talk) 21:10, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Where did you get that PDF from? It's a book that I know.^[1] Are you the author? — Fly by Night (talk) 21:19, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, the whole thing's on his site. I have the print copy, but sometimes use the online version as it's easier to search. Algebraist 21:29, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was reading the reference above and started to think. Take a sphere and glue the North and South pole. Do it pulling the points away from the centre around in an arc and then together. You will end up with the pinched torus. Now identify the same points by pushing the poles towards the centre. I've made a plot of this object. Is the pinched torus and this new object homeomorphic? After all, in both cases we started with the sphere and identified the poles. Or does the way you identify the points change the topology of the resulting quotient? — Fly by Night (talk) 14:37, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They're both a sphere with two points identified, so they're homeomorphic. They're just embedded in R³ in different ways. (I think one is the inverse of the other, but my geometrical intuition is quite poor). Algebraist 14:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a homeomorphism of R³ that takes one to the other? — Fly by Night (talk) 15:02, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. Algebraist 15:03, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help in my confusions. Your proofs are eutifull. I hope I'll be lucky enough to have more of them in the future! Topologia clalit (talk) 10:13, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the help on the question I had on correlation coefficient. You helped me a lot :-) - 114.76.235.170 (talk) 14:08, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --Andreas Philopater (talk) 17:48, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please make sure not to confuse minus signs (−) and en dashes (–), like you did here. Thanks. —bender235 (talk) 15:36, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello my math friend! I know you want me to learn TeX when you helped me before. But I have discovered the MS Word 2010 Equation Editor as being very friendly. Do you know if that Word set stuff can be used here on Wikipedia? All I can do is take a screen shot and insert images at this time. I thought that's not a good idea because nobody would be able to modify those equations and I don't think they would be searchable as images. My guess is that you are going to say, "Too bad Word doesn't save in TeX!". Bridgettttttte_babble^poop 17:31, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know nothing about microsoft equation editor. Algebraist 18:37, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why be everyone a–talkin' all strangely today?
☠  Because we  ☠ ☠ ARRRRRR! ☠
	With a yo-ho-ho, I be wishin' yer a right rollickin' ☠ Happy International Talk Like a Pirate Day ☠ To be a joinin' the fun and frolicks, yer can be addin' {{User:Chzz/pirate}} to the top o' yer talkpage / userpage for today, fer a fine fancy decoration. Emptied after midnight it'll be, so don't be dallyin' now! Hoist yer mainsail t'wards the I-R-Sea, either a'helpin' new sailors or on me own poopdesk, and let's parrty like it's 1699!  Cap'nChzz  ►  00:01, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Happy ITLAPD Capn' slappy and Ol Chumbucket Problems playing this file? See media help.	*How To Be Speakin' Pirate-Like *Official website *Auto-translate to pirate speak
Disclaimer: It's very rare for me to send messages like this; it might seem frivolous or hypocritical, as I often complain about myspacing of the project. However, as a pastafarian, this is my equivalent of a Christmas greeting. I seriously believe we need to have fun sometimes. If you object, I apologize; let me know, and I won't bother you again.

I suppose I should've timed this message at 10:10:10 too, but frankly, I can't be arsed. You know how it is.

Did you know... that tenten in Japaense writing are a little wiggly thing, a bit like a quotation-mark, which makes e.g. "ka" (か) into "ga" (が) or "fu" (ふ) into "bu" (ぶ) ?

So, take time out to have a bit of a giggle.

Not seen you around too much, recently; hope you are OK, etc.

All the best, and 10-10 'till we do it again.  Chzz  ►  08:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Algebraist, I was glad to see your advice at VPT. Do you think the possibility of making quote boxes with colored backgrounds might be worth documenting somewhere? (Though we should hardly recommend your shade of green :-). I have been using hacky ways of highlighting pieces of text that I copied from other people, without knowing of any official method. So there could be a pent-up demand for something like this. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 17:33, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The trend seems to be to encourage use of quotation templates rather than naked <blockquote> tags. Some templates, such as {{cquote}} and {{quote box}} support a background-colour parameter, but the main one, {{quote}}, does not. Adding that functionality would probably be the best way to make it easier to background-colour quotes. Algebraist 17:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:For3 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. -DePiep (talk) 04:28, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Since you've been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, I wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If that sounds like you and you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors during the current term, which started in January and goes through early May. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 21:51, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's what I just posted on CBM's talk page. I have had this conversation several times over the years I have been contributing to the Reference Desks. I'm sorry you see my actions as rude, I see yours as rude. I am not trying to be disruptive;

Sinebot exists to identify posts with the IP address of people who accidentally do not sign them with ~~~~. If a person chooses to deliberately not do that, they identify this by using !nosine!.

I contribute to Wikipedia from multiple IP addresses, all of which are shared addresses. Consequently the IP address I use for a particular contribution does not identify me and might be mistaken as identifying someone else. Consequently it is appropriate for me to use !nosine! and it is inappropriate for you to disrespect it.

I use a more or less consistent form of manual signature in order to allow my postings to be connected by the reader.

I am not going to register with Wikipedia and this is all the signature you are going to get.

Now stop playing sinebot.

--Anonymous, currently 208.76.104.133 (talk) 02:04, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware you have rudely decided not to create a wikipedia account, thus making it needlessly difficult for people to communicate with you and track your actions in general. I do not see why this is a reason for me to make it even harder by not linking your posts to your current IP. Algebraist 02:06, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Calmer now)

The IP addresses I use are not useful information because they are all shared. Please see also the post I just made on CBM's talk page. --208.76.104.133 (talk) 03:08, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Later) I have accepted that I have been in the wrong on this issue, after CBM cited WP:SIGN#Internal links. I reverted your addition an "unsigned" template. your edit as tantamount to altering content I posted, but that was wrong, because I should not have posted the original item in that way. I'm only surprised that nobody else pointed out the strongly worded policy until now, when I've been posting in that way for years. --208.76.104.133 (talk) 20:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't even get my apology right. I meant to say: "I reverted your edit adding an 'unsigned' template because I saw it as tantamount", etc. as above. --208.76.104.133 (talk) 04:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Curb Chain (talk) 14:53, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, so what you're saying is that {{multiple issues}} was placed on September 2009, and if I was to look in the edit history of Irish people in mainland Europe, it would indicate that {{lead too short}} was added at the same edit as well?Curb Chain (talk) 23:47, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have some comments about an amazing discussion (between JackSchmidt and you!) I discovered!!

Can I present them to you.?--Nourja (talk) 01:09, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited BSFA Award for Best Novel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Becky Chambers. 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) 09:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome

Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]