Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

category Reality also contains the article Potentiality and actuality

so perhaps there was a mistake on your part to remove this category, as at least some content of the article would in the future contain information relevant to this aspect of philosophy and would therefore be helpful to person's in navigation , so will be returning this category Drift chambers (talk) 20:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is useful to include because of the nature of infinity in the spatial infinite is that in an infinite universe the material elements are sharing a border with the supposed vacuum of empty space that is around the most outer stellar formations.→ [1][2]

will be returning Cat : Philosophy of Science on the grounds of this :

the stars etc of the universe (i.e. the stellar formations ) are availble to science to examine but infinity currently isn't (i.e. the furthest object observed by telescopy isn't the actual furthest universally) so is necessitated in science but also at the same time unavailable to scientific methods

will be returning Category : Belief on the grounds of these , with references available at → [3]

The notion of an infinite God, perfect in every way, is true of Christian belief. [34] God is defined as that which transcends the infinite Good, [86] The acceptance of the infinity of God is the decree of ecclesiastical dokein [88]

Drift chambers (talk) 21:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

in response to your reasoning that the categories were not useful to the understanding, be assured that the infinity itself is of no use at all, the term has no practical application (that is no practical application in science that might be of use so the term is useless in the world really - known of by this editor anyway, in respect to infinitity relevant to division i.e. the division of matter in science i.e. quantum physics) the concept is very much like the statement:

All art is quite useless.

O.Wilde ( contains adverts [4]) → [5]

Drift chambers (talk) 21:31, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Infinity is quite a useful concept, at least for mathematicians and probably for others. On the other hand, I don't see how adding that category would be. Certainly category membership is not transitive across links in the article -- I don't see why the article would merit the category just because Potentiality and actuality does. CRGreathouse (t | c) 22:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To avoid collapse into a black hole the mass m and radius r of a must satisfy

or equivalently

where G is the gravitational constant, c is Einstein's constant, and ρ is the density of the preon star. For ρ = 10²³ kg/m³, this gives a radius of at most 40 m and a mass of at most 2.7×10²⁸ kg.

CRGreathouse (t | c) 04:54, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CRGreathouse. You have new messages at OwenX's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, CRGreathouse. You have new messages at Template_talk:MacTutor#A_proposal.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Daniele.tampieri (talk) 12:32, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, there is an RfC concerning the Eidos page in which you have shown interest in the past. This is a small notification in case you may wish to take part in the discussion. Salvidrim! 20:44, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please explain how the following uses of rollback follow the rollback policy?

• Here, you revert the apparently innocuous change of "common" to "some".
• On Sieve of Eratosthenes, you rolled back a minor addition.
• In these three edits, you reverted an apparently sourced addition of content which unfortunately contained one sentence of original research. Couldn't you have just removed the comment?
• How does this follow the guidelines for rollback use?
• This was merely an inaccurate wording change.

Thank you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:06, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested (as de facto OEIS liason) in Wikipedia:Reference desk/Mathematics#number of non-isomorphic hamiltonian cycle on n-cubes?.--RDBury (talk) 17:25, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear CRGreathouse,

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 Wikipedia 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, were 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) 02:42, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have made no response to Reaper Eternal's message above, and also that you have continued to use rollback in ways that do not, on the face of it, appear to comply with the provisions of Wikipedia:Rollback feature. For example, this and this both look like reverts of good faith edits, and I cannot see anywhere where you explained your reasons for those reverts. Please do explain why you think your use of rollback is acceptable, as a user has indicated that they think you have been abusing rollback, as you can see at User talk:WillNess. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's not much to say -- when I edit (especially from mobile devices) my fat finger often hits "rollback" instead of "undo". Occasionally I make a null edit to explain, but usually it's not worth the hassle. Certainly whenever it becomes an issue I discuss it on the Talk page.

I wasn't aware that that WillNess was mounting this sort of campaign against me, thanks for pointing that out.

CRGreathouse (t | c) 14:47, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Please restore the page Jean-Claude Sikorav if you get a chance. Tkuvho (talk) 16:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like CBM already did. CRGreathouse (t | c) 20:32, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To prevent accidental vandalism, please place a block on this IP [anon-only, account creation enabled] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.116.204.34 (talk) 13:10, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I acknowledge the revert of Akritas2's edits you have done in Sturm's theorem. There is a similar problem in Root-finding algorithm (see [6]). Could you look at this?

Also, Budan's theorem is a page written by Akritas2, which is entirely devoted to the personal views of Akritas on the history of mathematics. What to do with it?

D.Lazard (talk) 16:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sufficiently familiar with the material at Budan's theorem to be comfortable editing there. My conclusion was the same as yours, but I feel out of place making changes without more topic knowledge.

I've been thinking about how to address the issue at Root-finding algorithm where I am more knowledgeable. I'm not sure if the material should be reverted, shortened, or rewritten. As I'm able I will make edits there.

CRGreathouse (t | c) 16:13, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks D.Lazard (talk) 17:59, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I am astonished that the author of the Sturm article claims that Sturm's method is available "in every computer algebra system". That is simply not true; he admits as much by claiming in his other article on root finding algorithms that maple has the Vincent-Collins-Akritas method as the default method! Mathematica, always had the VAS algorithm. (S works for Mathematica.) Sage also, etc etc ...

Besides, Sturm's method is to be compared with other methods; why does he not want this comparison? I believe that Lazard (whom I have never met or interacted with in the past) is the one who tries to impose HIS limited point of view on the readers. Besides, (assuming good intentions) his knowledge of English did not allow him to differentiate (in the article on root finding algorithms) between "Uspesnky's method" and "modified Uspensky's method" and he thought the two were interchangeable.

Also, on Sturm's theorem he talks about bounds and the only one that came to his mind was what he calls Cauchy's bound; Cauchy gave a bound ONLY on the positive roots and NOT on the absolute value of the roots. The mathematicians of the 19th century knew better. See my article on root bounds and Bourdon's algebra.

In summary, I have only ADDED material to the above mentioned articles and DID NOT ERASE anything Lazard wrote. I expect the same courtesy from him as well. He got his point and I have mine and I think both need to be taken into consideration. But we both have to write accuracies. So, I expect Sturm's method to be reverted to the previous version where I was saying that Sturm's method was used by "everybody until about 1980 --- when it was replaced by methods derived from Vincent's theorem", along with the supporting references.

And I close with the following: If Lazard does not like anything on my Budan article he should say so and explain the reason he does not like it. Saying that the article is "... entirely devoted to the personal views of Akritas on the history of mathematics" proves nothing; he should tell us his own views -- if he has any. My views have already been judged by peers.

Alkis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akritas2 (talk • contribs) 10:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you're discussing matters! But the best place for that is on the Talk pages of the affected articles, not here. CRGreathouse (t | c) 21:04, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A move discussion has started again on the article: Talk:Yerba mate#Requested move: ? Ilex paraguariensis. I am notifying you since you expressed an opinion in the topic in the past. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:55, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A move discussion has started again on the article: Talk:Mate (beverage)#Requested Move: ? Maté. I am notifying you since you expressed an opinion in the topic in the past. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:59, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code you were emailed. If you did not receive a code, email wikiocaasi@yahoo.com your Wikipedia username.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• If you need assistance, email or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 15:26, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of conjectures, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Hales (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) 11:05, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:10, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain at the article talk page why you are attempting to reinstate this material. Repeatedly reinserting this material without discussion or explanation, and against a consensus achieved at the talk page, is Wikipedia:Edit warring. Deltahedron (talk) 06:35, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is scarcely an adequate statement. You ignored the discussion, and incorrectly assert that User:Reddwarf2956 is an SPA, when that is patently untrue, and constitutes a personal attack. Merely repeating assertions without addressing the points made in the previous discussion is not a way to resolve a dispute. Please do not simply reinsert this material without adequate discussion leading to a consensus in its favour or it will be necessary to seek to have your editing restricted. If you wish to discuss the material you wish to insert, please do so at the article talk page: the discussion here on your talk page is about your behaviour. Deltahedron (talk) 17:11, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware of any discussion. I still don't see anything -- perhaps somewhere above, mixed in with other topics?

Further, I haven't seen any justification for the removal of the sourced material here. Should I take this to WP:DRN, or shall we discuss it here?

CRGreathouse (t | c) 07:01, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems hard to believe you have not seen this in which I explain the problems with your proposed material.

You need to obtain consensus before inserting this. Please revert this yourself and show willing to discuss the issues at the article talk page. Your constant reinsertion of the same text against consensus and without discussion is clear edit warring. Deltahedron (talk) 07:07, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't, thanks for the pointer. I'll respond there. - CRGreathouse (t | c) 07:12, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In future, read the article talk page and achieve consensus before inserting this material. If you reinstate this material in its present form without addressing the issues raised at the talk page and achieving consensus there, the next stop is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring. Deltahedron (talk) 09:18, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your input is requested at WT:WPM#Draft:Reckless Xi function. Sławomir Biały (talk) 00:37, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've recently done some revamping at Jevons paradox and would appreciate it if you had a look. Also, someone has apparently taken umbrage that the article doesn't declare that Jevons paradox dooms us all and there's nothing we can do about it, and has nominated the article for GA reassessment. As a co-sponsor of the original GA, it would be great if you could comment.[7] Best, LK (talk) 11:56, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See my Talk message to Temeku here: [8]. - CRGreathouse (t | c) 14:54, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Much thanks for your prompt action. LK (talk) 03:29, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

• Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
• Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
• Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
• Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
• Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
• Research coordinators: run reference services

Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (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) 13:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CRGreathouse. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

• Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
• A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CRGreathouse.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's been nearly 8 years since our paths paths have crossed on Wikipedia. I knew that the day I'd check back in, I'd see what I have now seen. Eight long years... that's literally as long as med school and residency, which for a math guy, eight years is length of time usually required to enact and complete the transformation function for elements of the set "matriculants" and assigns them at a fairly high rate to the set "successful independent physicians" and if my mathematical bona fides appear a bit clunky or contrived, then maybe it is by design or maybe it is not. The world will not end in either case, fortunately. Either way, our paths have merely crossed; but, I have for so long anticipated what this feeling would feel like, that my words might resonate an undeniable familiarity. If nothing else, may these words find you in good fortune and may the common bond of curiosity amongst our mathematically-minded brethren be the same today as it is in our past, present, and future.

Keep up the good work! But, let one final, modest tone of wisdom emanate from from my fingertips into cyberspace where they may be imprinted onto the fine, cuneiform tablets forming the foundational backbone of the internet: The chains of habit are too light to be felt until they're too heavy to be broken. Interpret these 17 words not for their literal meaning -- but for what they would mean if I were to have written exactly what you needed to have read. Then once you find meaning to what I were to have written, use my words in whichever way you see fit and in whichever way you choose to use them. Being the only person (that I know of) that has such powerful abilities to use written language beyond the scope of how the inventors of language and words ever foreseeably intended, I of course live a very unique and quaint life on a sequestered island in an endless sea of desolation from the world in which I concomitantly keep at arm's length. Godspeed, Adwctamia (talk) 03:14, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CRGreathouse. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

• A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
• Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
• Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

• When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
• Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
• The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

• JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Are you Charles R Greathouse IV on OEIS? I am Bobby Jacobs. I contributed a lot of sequences on OEIS. Now, I am contributing to Wikipedia. Bobby Jacobs (talk) 19:38, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am, welcome to Wikipedia Bobby. I primarily contribute on the OEIS but I am also an administrator on the English Wikipedia. - CRGreathouse (t | c) 04:56, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, CRGreathouse. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Lepricavark (talk) 00:28, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your input is requested at WT:WPM#Edits to number articles, since you are our resident expert on obscure properties of numbers.  :-) Sławomir Biały (talk) 19:53, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 19:52, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CRGreathouse. 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 Wikipedia 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)[reply]

Wishing CRGreathouse a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 21:28, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Admiral Rogers is an active duty Navy officer. He will be retiring from the Navy in the spring of this year. His replacement Army Lieutenant General Paul M. Nakasone's nomination is pending in the Senate. Once he's confirmed, Nakasone will be promoted to general when he assumes command of the NSA/CSS/USCYBERCOM from Rogers. Neovu79 (talk) 03:56, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CRGreathouse. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 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 Wikipedia 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wishing CRGreathouse a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! A 10 fireplane Imform me 15:52, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!
Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:06, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:34, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Profession user templates has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:20, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:34, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Yellow Blancmange.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned, low quality, replaceable

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:06, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Have a very happy adminship anniversary on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:21, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Math-citation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Izno (talk) 06:00, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:40, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it from this so that it says "In an area of mathematics called differential topology". Writing "In differential topology" fails to tell the lay reader that mathematics is the field within which this topic exists. Michael Hardy (talk) 20:27, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since you asked me to ping you if this COI issue came up on the perfect number article, again, pinging you about Talk:Perfect_number#Addition_for_the_odd_perfect_number_and_COI-_(III?). JoshuaZ (talk) 12:40, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

A token of thanks Hi CRGreathouse! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Wishing CRGreathouse a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Best wishes! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

CRGreathouse (t | c) 01:05, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We are currently running a study to evaluate the effectiveness of alternative algorithms for providing personalized task recommendations through SuggestBot. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
155		Hromada (talk)	Add sources
60		Territories claimed by the Philippines (talk)	Add sources
781		Port-au-Prince (talk)	Add sources
24		Anupam Saikia (talk)	Add sources
52		Ruth Teitelbaum (talk)	Add sources
30		National Eagle Scout Association (talk)	Add sources
204		Primordial black hole (talk)	Cleanup
276		Long division (talk)	Cleanup
185		Atacama Large Millimeter Array (talk)	Cleanup
104		Fomalhaut b (talk)	Expand
157		Citizens' assembly (talk)	Expand
226		Islam and blasphemy (talk)	Expand
628		Russian irredentism (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
336		Literary theory (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
44		Short division (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
27,814		2022 Pakistan floods (talk)	Merge
117		State collapse (talk)	Merge
125		Computational complexity of matrix multiplication (talk)	Merge
76		Murder for body parts (talk)	Wikify
294		Multiplication algorithm (talk)	Wikify
164		Giant Magellan Telescope (talk)	Wikify
2		Political opposition within the European Union (talk)	Orphan
3		Annabelle Boettcher (talk)	Orphan
6		Hans Jürgen Briegel (talk)	Orphan
73		Chintara Sukapatana (talk)	Stub
6		David G. Cory (talk)	Stub
4		Giovanni Fazio (talk)	Stub
14		Bình Long (talk)	Stub
5		NANTEN2 Observatory (talk)	Stub
15		Richard Bird (computer scientist) (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:08, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Nice, clear source you added. However, at 1 Ceres we have one from a couple years later that we summarize as saying Ceres "is at least close to being in hydrostatic equilibrium, though some deviations from an equilibrium shape have yet to be explained." That's why we didn't include Ceres with Pluto as confirmed to be in HE. Are we perhaps misreading the 2018 pub? — kwami (talk) 18:16, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Watt&diff=1125015620&oldid=1124791454 you've pointed at Betz law when explaining the difference between thermal and mechanical/electrical output of a steam powerplant. I think that's wrong, because Betz law only applies to turbines that operate on incompressible flows. This is not a correct assumption for steam flow in a steam turbine (the reason it's a valid assumption for air in an wind turbine is that the relative pressure drop across the turbine is negligible there, but is very much non-negligible in turbine setups intended to extract energy from steam while expanding it more than hundredfold). Robryk (talk) 02:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I added the link for comparison, but I see your point about incompressibility. But if we remove the link entirely, there's no discussion of efficiency at all, nor any sense of what the 30% efficiency of this setup means. Do you have a suggestion for wording or a link which would serve our readers better? - CRGreathouse (t | c) 02:47, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather point at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot%27s_theorem_(thermodynamics), which does apply to anything that produces mechanical (or any zero-entropy) power from thermal power, regardless of mechanism. Robryk (talk) 03:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In fact there's a school of thought where one should report efficiencies of heat engines (devices that convert thermal power to mechanical power) so that 100% is the limit that Carnot's theorem stipulates. I'm in a bit of a rush, so can't find references for that right now. Robryk (talk) 03:50, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of precision: the thing that matters for Betz's law is density change, and a flow can change its density due to pressure or temperature change (or, as is usually the case, both -- expansion is turbines is closer to adiabatic than isothermal). Robryk (talk) 03:48, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Carnot's theorem sounds perfect. Thanks for improving the article! - CRGreathouse (t | c) 20:23, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wishing CRGreathouse a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Γ₀ has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 4 § Γ₀ until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia 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 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:11, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]