Unless requested otherwise, I will reply on this page, under your post. Sometimes, especially when we haven't met before, I copy my answer to your talk page. -- Jitse Niesen

Archives
up to June 2005 Jul – Sep 2005 Oct – Dec 2005 Jan – Mar 2006 Apr – Jun 2006 Jul – Sep 2006 Oct – Dec 2006 Jan – Mar 2007 Apr – Jun 2007 Jul – Sep 2007 Oct – Dec 2007 Jan – Mar 2008 Apr – Jun 2008 Jul – Sep 2008 Oct – Dec 2008 2009 2010 – 2011

Why delete my effort for more browser compatibilty, the look is the same i have parse errors on firefox and opera browser on linux ubuntu. These are resolved now. I do not understand what you're motives are of deleting my wiki effort? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.129.75.52 (talk) 12:28, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jitse Niesen,

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 communityHERE, 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 nameHERE 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) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chlopeck (talk • contribs) 23:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See this diff.KlappCK (talk) 19:21, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry that your work got deleted. As it says at the top of Wikipedia:Pages needing attention/Mathematics, the lists are maintained by the bot and the part between the <!--jngoim:merge--> markers is periodically overwritten. You are welcome to add your text outside the markers if you want; the bot should preserve that. Additionally, there was a problem with the bot which meant that it did not list any pages at all; that is now fixed. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 22:30, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Silly bot! I'll give it a shot.KlappCK (talk) 04:16, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics is probably a better place to put your proposal on if you are interested in getting feedback. That talk page is watched by many active editors who are working on the maths pages on Wikipedia. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 09:39, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you to the yearly Berlin hackathon, 1-3 June. Registration is now open. If you need financial assistance or help with visa or hotel, then please register by May 1st and mention it in the registration form.

This is the premier event for the MediaWiki and Wikimedia technical community. We'll be hacking, designing, teaching, and socialising, primarily talking about ResourceLoader and Gadgets (extending functionality with JavaScript), the switch to Lua for templates, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Labs.

We want to bring 100-150 people together, including lots of people who have not attended such events before. User scripts, gadgets, API use, Toolserver, Wikimedia Labs, mobile, structured data, templates -- if you are into any of these things, we want you to come!

I also thought you might want to know about other upcoming events where you can learn more about MediaWiki customization and development, how to best use the web API for bots, and various upcoming features and changes. We'd love to have power users, bot maintainers and writers, and template makers at these events so we can all learn from each other and chat about what needs doing.

Check out the the developers' days preceding Wikimania in July in Washington, DC and our other events.

Best wishes! - Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation's Volunteer Development Coordinator. Please reply on my talk page, here or at mediawiki.org. Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation Volunteer Development Coordinator 00:13, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update to Predictor–corrector_method. At the time I added the euler trapezoidal example, there wasn't much in the article before and I had no references to cite, just writing it based on memory from decades ago. You might want to restore or add some comment about the corrector method being based on trapezoidal method, which is linear and not as accurate as a higher order method. For example, Runge Kutta 4 will usually be more accurate than 1 euler and multiple (3 or more) trapezoidal corrector steps. Rcgldr (talk) 19:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in Talk:Institute of Mathematics and its Applications#Merging in The Institute of Mathematics and its Applications. Yaris678 (talk) 14:19, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the move from 2nd Order Interpolation to Second-Order Interpolation. But I noticed you also added that it could be called biquadratic interpolation, as a 2nd degree version of bicubic interpolation? Second-Order interpolation is a different method altogether. Notice that in bicubic interpolation you use information about the http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/science/07first.html?ref=sciencehttp://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/science/07first.html?ref=sciencewhich is not the case in second-order interpolation. So in summary I don't believe this method had been discovered before, so let's discuss what should be done with the page.Bpthurston (talk) 22:42, 2 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpthurston (talk • contribs) 22:40, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Just in case you didn't get my email: Your bot has been in hibernation for a few days, and the "current activities" page is not getting updated. Michael Hardy (talk) 23:50, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is highly possible you forgot about an edit you made to Talk:Korfball in 2006. I was doing some research on something else, and ran across a relevant cite, which I just added to the Talk page so I'll leave it to you to see if there's anything to be done.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:58, 27 October 2012 (UTC

time to update the Moscow MATH. PAPYRUS .. http://www.academia.edu/617613/Egyptian_Fractions_Unit_Fractions_Hekats_and_Wages_-_an_Update

1

Dear Jitse Niesen,

I found that in the article Tridiagonal matrix you added condition for the matrix to be similar to Hermitian matrix: a_k,k+1 a_k+1,k ≥ 0. I found references only for strict inequality. Could you please give the reference(s) on non-strict condition?--Krystofer (talk) 14:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Krystofer, I'm afraid my text was not very clear: with the non-strict condition, the matrix is not necessarily similar to Hermitian, but it still has real eigenvalues (think of the matrix [1 1;0 1]). I added a reference and tried to clarify the text. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 15:43, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Jitse, for clarification and the reference. --Krystofer (talk) 20:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jitse! I've been looking around for a bot to update clean-up listings and I finally found yours. Many WikiProjects previously used User:WolterBot but the supporting user has left, the bot died and the code has left with him. A slow ToolServer fix has been around, but it doesn't compare to the excellent output of your bot.

I checked out the code, but it didn't appear to be commented. I also noticed the bot has several functions, so I thought it might be easier to ask you how to extend the code to include updated clean-up listings for other projects. I'm familiar with python and could certainly work on the code, and/or learn to create a new bot. Thanks! Scientific29 (talk) 12:42, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm quite willing to help you with understanding the code. It is indeed not commented and it has grown over time in a mess that I'm not particularly proud but it (mostly) does its job. One difference with WolterBot (if I remember correctly) is that WolterBot uses a category to find which pages belong to a particular WikiProject, but my bot uses the output of another bot, User:Mathbot, which writes a list with all maths pages.

At the moment, I'm running the bot on a computer at a university where I used to work, but I'm quite keen to move it to the ToolServer (or whatever it supposed to take its place). As you may have noticed, my Wikipedia activity has dropped considerably, so this may give me the impetus to do some work.

How shall we continue? Can you tell me in a bit more detail what you want to do? -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 15:53, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please participate in the debate. Solomon7968 (talk) 12:05, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.ma.hw.ac.uk/~jitse/wikipedia/rpim.php seems to have stopped working — indeed http://www.ma.hw.ac.uk/~jitse now gets a 404. Is there any replacement, for instance via your leeds address? —David Eppstein (talk) 06:52, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. I intend to transition it to the toolserver, but probably won't have time for it this week. I removed the link from the Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics for now and will put it back when I get it working again. Thanks for letting me know; I hadn't noticed. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 08:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's back. ---- Jitse Niesen (talk) 18:04, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for removing the technical and improve banners. I was tempted to remove them myself but I did not want to get into an edit war with the editor who put them there. I believe that many mathematics articles are necessary technical and that the Matrix splitting article was quite clear and no more difficult for the average reader than many other articles about advanced mathematical topics, but that editor maintained that an article should not be technically difficult to understand just because "other stuff exists." I suppose that some situations like this are a "judgment call."

I am currently in the process of adding more material to the example to explain how the Gauss-Seidel method and the Successive over-relaxation method can be created by using a matrix splitting.

All the best! — Anita5192 (talk) 20:59, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Was that a !vote delete or just a comment? Dougweller (talk) 12:54, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jitse, I understood your point. The problem is Victor was neither a rock star nor a man of high administrative position at the Saint Petersburg University. Just a man who always told what he thought and thus sometimes not very comfortable to deal with. As you may see from the list of his achievements, he actually retired from the University many years ago and, I am afraid, is quite forgotten by the administration. I asked some people "in position" to post something official, but I am not sure I will succeed, especially due to the fact that since 1999 I leave in Lisbon. I may ask Marina, Victor's daughter, to scan his death certificate, but I am not very comfortable to publish it in the net. Are there some alternatives? Yours, Andrei Utkin, Victor's co-author Outkine (talk) 14:35, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, a proposal regarding pre-adminship review has been raised at Village pump by Anna Frodesiak. Your comments here is very much appreciated. Many thanks. Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mathematics has a link to http://tools.wmflabs.org/jitse-bot/rpim, but it seems to be broken. I would like to find random articles in a general category like mathematics. How does your random function work? Could it be used for any subject? Thanks! RC711 (talk) 03:45, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Matrix polynomial, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Minimal polynomial (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) 08:52, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jitse, I just tried this link and again got the no web service error message. When this was last fixed I started to use it again and realized how useful I found this tool. Thanks for making it available and hopefully getting it running again. Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 19:21, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I just tried the link at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics which points to http://tools.wmflabs.org/jitse-bot/rpim.py and it works for me. Perhaps it was just a temporary glitch? Or perhaps you clicked another link somewhere which has not been updated to point to the correct URL? -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 20:53, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary glitch. It worked fine for me just now. Thanks. Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 21:55, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there,I'm that user who's been the victim of editing the Fields Medal page(i.e.I got blocked with charge of Vandalism.).I've got three question:1)When the current protected status of that page ends,Does the page current contents remain in place or they are replaced with the old version? 2)I've prepared a new and somehow comprehensive table about Fields medalists.I posted this table on the discussion section of the Fields Medal page,and I request for comments about this(If You come there and see my that table I will be really glad,and don't forget to put your comment about it down there!;-)),but so far,just one person did so.Is it normal? 3)Should I submit a request for edit to replace the new table with current one?Or should I wait for reaching a consensus?Thank You. Rezameyqani (talk) 07:50, 19 August 2014 (UTC)Rezameyqani (talk) 08:26, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Would you be interested in attending one of the next wikimeets in the north of England? They will take place in:

• Leeds on 12th April 2015
• Manchester on 26th April 2015
• Liverpool on 24th May 2015

If you can make them, please sign up on the relevant wikimeet page!

If you want to receive future notifications about these wikimeets, then please add your name to the notification list (or remove it if you're already on the list and you don't want to receive future notifications!)

Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:36, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are inactive, you should no longer be an administrator. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:38, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 October 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) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like http://tools.wmflabs.org/jitse-bot/rpim.py and the random maths article tool has gone away. I've removed the like to it from WP:WPM, if you have to reappear and get the bot working I can be restored.--Salix alba (talk): 17:58, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jitse Niesen. 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. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 01:30, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two pages I've been somewhat following are under edit wars: Alaska Thunderfuck 5000 and Katya Zamolodchikova. I believe this is happening because a reality TV show they were both on just ended. Is there any way you can help? Aleccat (talk) 15:09, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux ^Talk 03:43, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:45, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That is fine, thanks for letting me know. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 09:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jitse Niesen. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jitse Niesen. 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]

Hello, Jitse Niesen. 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]

Hi, Jitse Niesen! As a mathematician, could you chime in Talk:Proportion. Thanks. Mikus (talk) 17:39, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jitse Niesen. 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]

Thanks for uploading File:Leeds Cycling Campaign logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:29, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]