This user is in college. This user is taking a wikibreak and may be away or inactive for varying periods of time. Although they may occasionally be able to do some editing, messages left for them may not be replied to for a while. They will be back on Wikipedia when college is over.

Important-Please Read If I have made an erroneous edit on a math article talk page, correct it! If there is still a problem drop me a line here, thanks ;).

P.S. I will reply here unless otherwise specified, so remember to watch this page.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4

Dear Cronholm,

Your letter was so moving, and of course I would be happy and honored to welcome you to Wikipedia! :) Rather than listing the tutorials and other resources at your disposal, let me point you quickly to the Help pages (which I find very good) . Then let's walk together through the starlit garden, listen in silence to the nightingale and the piper far away; and then let's talk with one another of more personal things that may be helpful.

Wikipedia holds many treasures and pleasures, and I hope that you will taste them all: the friendship of kind, smart and wonderfully well-meaning people; the flush of joy upon understanding something difficult at long last; and the warmth of feeling that you are helping people everywhere. Grace is in the air, faith the gentle tissue that binds us together. Occasionally I feel down; I sometimes lose my faith that I'm doing any good, or that I'm helping people, or that other Wikipedians even like me. :( I suppose that such thoughts occur to us all from time to time; yet remember, when Wikipedia looks bleak, that you have a friend in me and I in you. There is magic in such friendships, silver threads we may follow back to a bright place .

You may meet opinionated people here, sometimes imperfectly informed, or speaking dismissively. I believe in gentleness and compassion for all flavors of people, especially remembering my own limitations and failings. A person's true strength, in the real world and especially here in Wikipedia, is measured not by bending bars but by opening minds, don't you agree? We share a common enemy, ignorance; we should work together selflessly and serenely to banish it from each other and from the world outside. If another editor throws a javelin at you, remember that nothing can truly hurt us here; we're ethereal spirits in this ghostly little world, and javelins pass through us. ;)

Wishing you everything good that Wikipedia can bring, Willow 03:22, 25 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please allow me to apologize on behalf of the Mathematics WikiProject for not welcoming you earlier. I hope I can persuade you to take this as a compliment: personally, I found your contributions to calculus and the discussions there so helpful that it did not even occur to me that you might be a newcomer! Anyway, I see you have registered as a participant on the project: that is great! I'm sure you also know that Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics is a great place to share ideas which are not related to a particular article or which require a wider discussion. So it remains for me to add the welcome message that should have been placed here a week or two ago, but which probably does not contain any information that you do not already know :) Anyway...

Welcome!

Hello, Cronholm144, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place ((helpme)) after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  Geometry guy 11:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS. I usually reply on my talk page to messages placed there (to make the thread easier to follow). In particular, I replied to your message of 22nd April there. Similarly, when I leave a message on a user page, like now, I add the page to my watchlist (at least for a few days) in case you reply here.

Hello again, Cronholm! I would like to commend you for going over tons of articles and noticing the ones that need action. You are performing a valuable task by bringing to our attention the articles that are less than perfect. But I am a bit alarmed by some comments you had made at WT:WPM concerning placing prod tags, even though I thought they were probably, even likely, in jest. In Wikipedia, as in real life, threats of any kind are efficient only because people would react to them. Making threats can be a very efficient tool for achieving a short-term goal, although you may get a result you wouldn't have wished for. But both here and in the wide blue world, threats are really counterproductive in the long run. Either you have to act on them, which, needless to say, would not make you very popular, to put it mildly, or they lose their effect. Voluntary cooperation is nearly always a much better model to follow.

Concerning the case at hand, WP:Prod states that the prod tag is more-or-less an equivalent of the speedy deletion, and hence should only be used for articles whose deletion is entirely uncontroversial, as they obviously do not belong here. Therefore, the process is designed to be as unbureaucratic as possible: often, one administrator, whose area of expertise may have nothing to do with mathematics, will decide whether to delete the article. I do not have any statistics to back it up, but I suspect that, in the absense of other information, they will delete it. Now the flip side is that, once an article is deleted in this way, every mention of it disappears from the edit history of its contributors, and its virtually impossible to figure out what has happened (naturally, links from other articles survive and turn red, but what if the article is not extensively linked to?) You may still remember the great controversy over the speedy deletion of Institute for Mathematics and its Applications, and how it upset many people. Moreover, the deleting administrator will not necessarily follow the proper procedure and cancel the prod if someone objects to it, or keep the talk page with discussion of the reasons. In a nutshell, there is no good reason to use prod over AfD for mathematics articles, except in very few cases, such as obvious hoaxing.

Anyway, these are just some things to keep in mind (or, as the saying goes, ignore at your own peril!). I hope they don't discourage you from continuing to rate articles and identifying weak spots, which is very much appreciated. Best, Arcfrk 00:11, 25 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Related question (for Arcfrk or Cronholm): I placed a recent prod over at multispatial geometry, arguably a hoax/OR/neologism (or something like it — it's difficult to figure out what the article is actually talking about). Should this be AfD instead of prod? I rather like the idea of having some less easily contested paper trail leading up to an article's deletion. What's your recommendation? Silly rabbit 00:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now, that is a good example of prod. Another recent good example of a prod-suitable article was a two-sentence piece about an inequality recently discovered by two Albanian schoolboys, one of whom was 17 years old. Due to the simplified prod procedure, no information about it survives, which is just as well in this case. Arcfrk 01:37, 25 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Arcfrk, I am aware of the possibly counterproductive longterm effect of my threats of PRODding, but I have attempted to do a couple of things to avoid becoming the boy who cried wolf. I offer (and follow through see the history of the J articles that I identified) to clean up the articles that I have identified as weak. Secondly, I hope I have made it clear that Prodding is a last resort, I don't want the articles to be deleted, I want the articles to be more than one or two misleading sentences. So far I have only attached the Prod to one article after posting at WT:WPM (Jarnik's Theorem). It is my belief that an article that misleads the reader should be deleted, but before deletion I believe that every effort should be made to make it into a presentable article. This is how I justify the Prod threat. I will admit that I was much more liberal this time than before, which I don't intend to do again. I did try to modify my tactics when I posted the J articles, but no one responded until I mentioned prod. Trust me, I would much rather not have to mention prod to encourage editors to respond. Anyway, I have begun to ramble, so I will cut myself off here. Cheers--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree, the guidelines on PRODding make it pretty clear that an article should only be PRODded if its deletion is entirely uncontroversial. However, there are no guidelines for threatening to PROD an article :) :) Geometry guy 14:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Of course, I agree with Arcfrk, that this does not mean it is necessarily wise...)

I will do try my best to act prudently when wielding my fearsome weapon :)--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 15:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aak! I read that as pruriently the first time around... Oh nevermind. Silly rabbit 15:55, 25 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hah! Freud might have something to say about you thinking that. Come to think of it, I think the police might have something to say about me pruriently wielding my fearsome weapon

Thanks again for your amazing work at girih tiles. With regard to Countable set, your new illustration appears to be the positive rational numbers (with duplicates) rather than pairs of natural numbers including zero for which the text calls. Also Pairing function could do with an improved illustration. It would be nice to use the same illustration for both articles, I think. I would have to change the text at countable set a little to account for the change in the order of the pairs. JRSpriggs 08:47, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the compliment. :) Do you want me to make the natural number pairings picture? I will go ahead and remake the png on Pairing function now. Cheers--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 12:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I guess that I need to try harder to be explicit in my requests.

Regarding Pairing function, I meant that the existing illustration is inappropriate and should be scrapped. There is no reason to show the points at different sizes; and level lines have nothing to do with the pairing. Instead, it would be nice to have again a grid with coordinates in {0, 1, 2, 3, ...}, but now the intersections would be labeled with the value of the pairing function and little arrows would go from 0=<0,0> to 1=<1,0> to 2=<0,1,> to 3=<2,0> to 4=<1,1> to 5=<0,2> to 6=<3,0> to 7=<2,1> etc.. Is that clear?

When that is done acceptably, I will change Countable set to use that same illustration and change the text accordingly. JRSpriggs 08:12, 28 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Heh, no problem--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 10:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here it is I can tweak it to be more like my rational pic, its up to you.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 11:39, 28 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your effort. The picture looks a little too cluttered. I would suggest that it would be sufficient to go to three in each direction (rather than seven). A margin would help. Actually, I was hoping to have the coordinates (row and column numbers) in the margin and the numerical value of the pair at each intersection. So the column for x=1 would be labeled with a "1" beneath it, and the row for y=2 would be labeled with a "2" at its left. At their intersection, would be "8" representing the fact that 8 = <1,2> = [((1+2)^2 + (1+2))/2] + 2. JRSpriggs 06:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll get on it but I am wikibreaking.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 12:17, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you again. That is much better. I put it into the pairing function article. Now on to the countable set article. JRSpriggs 09:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you sure you don't want me to tweak it a bit? That is just a rough sketch.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 13:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think the picture is usable as it is. However, if you want to improve it, go ahead. For example, you could: move the column and row numbers a little further out and center them on their column/row; remove little marks extending from the dots on the edges; make the arrows a little longer, especially the arrows which lead back from the upper-left to the lower right; have separate "0"s for the zeroth row and the zeroth column; and make the lines along the edges less prominent. But I do not want to waste your time. Thanks again. JRSpriggs 01:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes. That is even better. Thanks again. JRSpriggs 03:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There appears to be something wrong with the file which contains your new image. When I go to the image (by clicking on it), I see the "image" tag at the top of the page in RED when it should be in BLUE. Also when I edit my watch list, it appears in red (indicating that the file does not exist) and when I click on that it goes into edit mode as it would when there is no file. I do not understand what the problem is. JRSpriggs 04:05, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is transcluded from commons, you can't edit or watch it from WP--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 04:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

By mistake, I reverted your talk page edit at Henri Lebesgue before realising you had added the Alma Mater. Sorry about that! I put a message on the talk page just to check if there is anything else. Geometry guy 20:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem(I thought the infobox request was old) and I commented on the talk page.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 21:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Cronholm144,

I am a fellow mathematician looking for friends. Please drop me a line sometime. Carbogen

		The E=mc² Barnstar
		For your absolutely incredible vector diagrams (learned of them through Willow's Talk page). And I thought I was handy with SVG :) Keep up the good work! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:51, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you so much :-), I LOVE doodling in inkscape, if you want to collaborate on an image just let me know. --Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 01:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Woah, I just saw you gallery... beautifully done!--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 01:58, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I've noticed that you have added a notability tag to an article that I started about the Spa Novices' Hurdle. I've added a comment on the discussion page re not merging into the Cheltenham Festival article, and I can probably reference it to results in the Racing Post's database - do you think that would establish notablity? Thanks for any comments. Bcp67 20:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Cronholm, you have a lot of interesting user templates refering to interests, how many edits you made etc. Where did you find those? Akiramenai 08:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On the rationals-page you wrote that Q can be characterized topologically as the unique countable metrizable space without isolated points. I would be interested in a reference for this.

Thanks in advance, Stwitzel 09:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes. What about Q×Q with the L¹ norm? JRSpriggs 05:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I didn't write that I don't think... I told Stwitzel this as well. --Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 06:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Upon further inspection it appears that I have only made one edit to that page and I was just adding a pic. BTW JRS do you want me to tweak that pic, I meant that image to be a rough outline.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 06:16, 5 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the welcome, hope I can be of some help. Weston.pace 21:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem, if you have any trouble don't hesitate to contact me or post at WT:WPM Cheers--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 22:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cronholm144, don't get angry, Man. If this controversy gets over, believe me, you will not find me making any personal attacks. RaviJames 05:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, that's fine. But you will have to do a little bit of work on your end to earn back the trust of the editors. Pursuing this further will likely result in you being blocked again. Dev gets unblocked in 5 days, and you have a shiny new account. Tell him to just wait it out and it will be like it never happened. The reason that Dev's block will not be rescinded is because he used you to evade a block, which is clearly against policy. --Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will tell Devraj5000 to wait for 5 days. And, please, I don't want any more controversies. Thank you. Ravi. RaviJames 05:55, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cool, I know you got off to a rocky start, but I hope you enjoy it here. It can be very pleasant once meet like-minded editors. Good luck--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 06:00, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, no offense intended. I just saw it while RC patrolling and thought I'd add a couple tags. DraxusD 11:58, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

None taken, it just scared me when the article was tagged out of nowhere.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 12:02, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm appreciative of your interventions on this article. As I previously mentioned, as jayjg did not communicate with me or even publicly justify his actions to revert and ban me, I wrote to him on his talk page asking: "Can you please explain why you've blocked me from editing articles and reverted all my contributions, even from past articles? Specifically Masada, why have you reverted it to a state that predates my edits and now leaves no mention of the glaring fact that in Israel and int'l academic circles the myth of Masada has been exposed by various authors of high repute and published in major publications? Why have you not attempted to communicate with me about any of this? Have you read the cites I provided? Are you aware of any reputable sources that contradict these sources?"

As you can see, here, he undid my question and removed it from his talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AJayjg&diff=144103240&oldid=144098410 I don't think anyone with the powers of administration should be behaving like this. My worry is that he will further ban me so I'll be unable to correspond. Truth-evenifithurts 04:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since you are not currently engaging in activity that is against policy, a block would be inappropriate and would not stand.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 04:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

His statements included the phrase "your abitrary use of your admin powers", which is clearly a personal attack, and claims that I have "banned" him, which are simply false. I don't need to put up with those on my Talk: page. Regarding the rest of the issue, the IP editor in question was edit-warring on a number of articles. Aside from the fact that the material he was inserting quite obviously violated WP:NPOV, he had also clearly violated WP:3RR on Masada and WP:BLP on Robert Fishman. I suppose I could have blocked him, but instead I semi-protected the pages in order to encourage him to engage in dialog. I've clearly been successful at that, though his dialog appears to be as belligerent as his edits. Perhaps you can help him moderate his tone, and cut back on the number of venues in which he is airing his grievances - I believe he's up to seven different pages now, and counting. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am trying to consolidate everything to his talkpage. It would be great if you could engage him in conversation. Cheers--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:17, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Feel free to add my comment there, if you wish. I don't care to engage with this editor until he stops making belligerent uncivil and false accusations and claims. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sigh... If that is how you feel, but remember that he is a new user and is not familiar with all of the rules. --Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The rules of civil discourse transcend Wikipedia. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:27, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To be fair, when he saw that you reverted his edits, he probably thought that that was uncivil. It is best to engage with people to resolve a conflict whenever possible. If I can convince him to extend an olive branch, will you take it?--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:30, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure, but let's confine the discussion to the page you set up for it, not my Talk: page, and please make sure that he does not make any further accusations. If he has questions, then they should be phrased as real questions, not as accusations with a question mark at the end. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alright.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:44, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Cronholm144.

I'm puzzled by this new article. Something seems to be missing in the description of the polynomials p to which you refer. The only restriction on p seems to be that it is of degree n. But then the inequality cannot possibly be true. For instance, the Chebyshev polynomial of degree 1 is just x. But then the inequality you've displayed says that p(x) < x for all x > 1, and clearly there are polynomials p of the first degree for which this is not true.

I'd straighten it out myself, but I can't access the paper you cited, and other papers I could access didn't have a simple clear-cut definition that made any sense. Can you clarify this? Thanks! DavidCBryant 18:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yep, I'll get on it.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 22:14, 12 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Cronholm. I've modified the article Remez inequality so it makes more sense. You might want to take a look at it. The thing that was missing was a description of the set π_n(σ) – you had used this fancy symbol in the TeX markup, but didn't describe it well enough for me to understand what it meant. Thanks for the e-mail! DavidCBryant 17:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your message of congratulations! And for contributing those mathematical illustrations; those are pretty nifty. Cheers, Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 03:20, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My pleasure, thanks, and best of luck!--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 03:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. I've edited a few articles you've created, and they prompt some comments about Wikipedia style conventions (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (mathematics) and Wikipedia:Manual of Style.

• It's not a good idea to start by saying "Let x be...". You should first inform the non-mathematician readers that mathematics is what the article is to be about. See my edits to Remez inequality. Something like "In mathematics, the Remez inequality is..." is enough.
• On Wikipedia, TeX looks good when "displayed", thus:

${\displaystyle \int _{-\infty }^{\infty }1\,dx}$

but when it's "inline" rather than "displayed" it often gets badly misaligned or is the wrong size, conspicuously so.

• If you create a new article on an inequality, could you add it to the list of inequalities? I've already done this with Remez inequality.
• Remez inequality should say who Remez is and link to the article about him if there is one.

More later.... Michael Hardy 04:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I watch all of the articles that I write and have made note of the changes you have made. Indentations, \left\right ''ex.''. I did not know about that list but I would be happy to add them in the future. My first exposure to TeX was about a month ago, so I will probably make more mistakes. As for the intros, that is a failing on my part and I will write more in the future, when I go on a writing spree I tend to neglect the finer points of basic article writing.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, it also appears that when you go on a writing spree, you just copy stuff wholesale from other web sites. This article, for instance, is word for word identical with the Springer on-line encyclopedia article.

Please read WP:COPYVIO before you go off on another "writing spree". DavidCBryant 16:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Two more points:

• An article should should start with a complete sentence, not a dictionary-style definition.
• The title word or title phrase should be set in bold at its first appearance (usually, but not necessarily always, in the first sentence).

Michael Hardy 18:26, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was my understanding that Mathworld was GFDL and I cited it as such in the article. As for the Springer link stuff, I cited that website as well. I should have probably synthesized it in a different way, my mistake. --Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 18:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I understand that you might not yet be familiar with Wikipedia's policy on copyrights. I think you made an innocent mistake. I don't want to hurt you, Cronholm – I just want to get you to stop copying copyrighted content wholesale. That will just make trouble for everyone.

I really don't understand how Mathworld could be mistaken for a GFDL site. Every one of their pages bears this legend:

© 1999-2007 Wolfram Research, Inc. | Terms of Use

which pretty clearly indicates that they've copyrighted their content. You might want to review those terms of use. DavidCBryant 18:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are right, I guess it is Planetmath that is GFDL... Well in that case I will have to go through quite a few of the articles that I have transcluded from there and delete them...sigh.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 19:02, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You can probably get some good advice on the best thing to do from an administrator. I'd suggest talking to Oleg about it. We may be able to make the articles over again. I'll be glad to help with that. DavidCBryant 22:03, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes I will do that, thanks so much, any help is appreciated. I really feel like an ass, so I might take a break from wikipedia for a day or two before retrying on those articles.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:39, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copying articles from MathWorld or Springer is of course not OK. Those articles should be either deleted or rewritten from scratch. Let me know if I can help in any way.

I have a style note too. One should not insert links in section names, there's a style convention about that. Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 06:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have recreated definition only articles for Dedekind criterion, Alexander matrix, Thomson cubic, 0,1-simple lattice, 6-sphere coordinates, Abel's criterion(used redirect, careful not to delete the history for Abel's test), and Abel's curve theorem, and I think it would be best if their initial edits be purged form the history as copyvio.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 15:32, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I deleted older versions of all those articles, except Dedekind criterion which I deleted altogether. I think that one better be recreated from scratch, as it is still very similar to the Springer article.

A few more suggestions. Articles should be categorized and links to relevant topics should be made.

And another aside, when you create figures based on figures from books, it is good not to imitate the style of those figures too closely, again, just in case, not to have trouble later. I am not saying you've been doing that, I actually have no idea, but in view of the above issues with copyright, I thought I'd mention this.

Lastly, Cronholm, don't get discouraged. All of us do silly things every now and then. You have done a lot of good work, and I am sure you will do a lot more in the future. Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Oleg, I hope so. I am bad about interlinking and categorization. Although I had given cats to the original articles, that got lost when I rewrote.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 06:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I hate to bother you about this, but it seems to me that when you created Image:Bring radicals cartoon.svg you failed to give credit to the author, CyborgTosser (talk · contribs), of the previous version, Image:Bring radicals cartoon.PNG, upon which you based your version. As I understand it, GFDL allows free use of images and text with conditions which include giving credit. JRSpriggs 01:10, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done, and please bother me about any possible copyright violations, I have lost confidence in myself in this regard.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:34, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your recent contribution to a few logic articles. Have you considered joining the Wikipedia:WikiProject Logic? It is an effort to coordinate the work of Wikipedians who are knowledgeable about logic in an effort to improve the general quality and range of Wikipedia articles on logic topics. We at the project invite your participation and correspondence. Be well.

Gregbard 06:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Cronholm, currently I am working on the Iran Red Emblem at the Graphics lab and I need the changing of shape of one of the elements, I remeber when I was working with you on the Ethiopian one, that you could work with SVG's very manualy (eg drawing paths from scatch) and so if you would, I would like you to help me on it, the instructions are on the page. Thanks. > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 10:09, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 10:42, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, could you bend the wing to fit in the yellow shape that you made (the wing) cheers. > Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 13:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

...for your nice gesture of support on my user page, I appreciate it! I'm aware that editing general relativity is going to need more, ahem, patience than editing Introduction to general relativity – I'll see how it goes, I guess. Take care, Markus Poessel 08:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since the dispute concerns the article content and not any personal issues with KSmrq, I fail to see why KSmrq can revert my edits without any discussion while I'm expected to run simpering after him and try to make him engage in the discussion by posting in his talk page. In my long experience of Wikipedia, I didn't have the perception that this is how things are supposed to be done. Consensus editing is impossible to achieve without discussion, something KSmrq repeatedly refuses. Loom91 11:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What consensus? You posted and no one engaged with you about the quadrature. That is not consensus.As for the other edits, they are probably fine. But they have been reverted because you insisted on furthering a cold war. I don't really care if you consider talking with another editor simpering, but if you to do not engage in a real discussion soon... I don't even know.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 12:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do not appreciate threats, Cronholm, do not make them. I've been trying to engage in discussion, KSmrq has refused to. Do not attempt to make it appear as if I've been avoiding discussion and engaging in a revert war. Loom91 12:18, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Threats...you must be joking... I was expressing my frustration(at very high levels) at the insanity of this whole affair. BTW I do know now what I am going to do, I have posted on WT:WPM, and I am about to post on 3 admin's pages about this and hopefully they can sort this mess out. I have done nothing but advocate discussion in regards to this matter. BTW, Everyone has refused to continue to discuss the that you reverted. You are engaged in a revert war. You did use a a rationale that cited discussion when none had taken place. I engaged with you on the talk page and warned you that this would happen. I have run out of patience and I am not going to engage(like King Bee) at Integral until this matter has been resolved. I have lost my ability to be objective.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 12:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was thinking of mediation as the effect of the RfC seemed to be limited in the long term, but since you have already posteed at WT:WPM, I'll wait for a couple of days and see how this turns out. In any case, I fail to see how one partial revert by me qualifies as a revert war. I'm not going to engage in another one of those. Loom91 12:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It may come to mediation. As for the partial revert, it was very short-sighted, as you must have known what the result of that would be.(KSmrq reverting...=continued revert war)--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 12:48, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You could have asked me of my intentions instead of assuming them. Of my three edits, that one was apparently supported by consensus in the talk. I thought that perhaps KSmrq had no specific objection to that edit (apart from the general objection he seems to have to me) and had reverted it along with the others. That's why I reverted once, and if KSmrq reverted me again I was going to file for mediation instead of reverting. Loom91 13:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Carl, continuing unpleasantness at Integral. I can't deal with it anymore. Please intervene. See also my post here here. Cheers--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 12:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm sorry to hear that that article is stressing you out. I am currently editing another article with Loom91, so I don't want to get involved with the integral article. In the end, I'm sure the article will be fine, mostly because there are a large number of active editors in the math project who will insist on a good outcome. In the meantime, I hope you find other articles that you can edit enjoyably. — Carl (CBM · talk) 13:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your kind words Carl. I have recused myself from the situation. I have also alerted Oleg and Jitse, so no worries on that front. (rambling begins here)I have had a terrible wiki-week, so I think I am going to do some drone work for solace. (i.e. creating planetmath-based stubs and rating some articles.) Cheers.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 13:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Cronholm. Could you explain what you mean by this edit? I think the previous version was OK, real and complex analytic functions have both similarities and differences. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 15:41, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is an empty statement. All thing have similarities and differences. If we are going to say something like that we need to be a little more concise.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 15:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The text goes into detail about that below. One can't put everything in the intro, but the fact that real and complex analytic functions can be very similar in some ways yet extremely different in other ways is extremely important I believe and needs to be in the intro (by modifying the intro a bit, if you wish). Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 15:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok I will try to modify it so that it has some substance.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 15:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, I think leads should be able to stand alone and make sense ... well you know what I mean...per WP:LEAD--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 15:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC) Sorry Oleg, I wrote that at hour 22 of wakefulness and was a touch frazzled. I realized why it was such an empty statement though. The fact that they are both called analytic implies similarity and the fact that they are mentioned separately implies a difference.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 14:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, Cronholm. I just made some stylistic changes to this article – you might want to look it over to be sure I didn't muck anything up.

You also might want to look at WP:CITET to learn about citation templates. I think you're still learning about TeX and LaTeX. One reference I've found very handy is this document from the American Mathematical Society. Not everything in there will work on Wikipedia, but most of it will.

Oh -- one other little hint. The graphics generated by <math> and </math> don't always come out the same size. You can put a \, string (medium space) in any TeX formula to make it bigger. I'm not sure why this works, but it does.

${\displaystyle x=y}$

${\displaystyle x=y\,}$

Have a great day! DavidCBryant 11:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks I will take a look. Much better, thanks!. I figured that trick out about a week ago (by watching Michael Hardy) and was very pleased with the result. I wonder if that should be included in WP:FORMULA?--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 14:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually, the better magic is "\,\!", which asks for a thin space (not a medium space) followed by a negative thin space. (Thus it has no effect on spacing.) I believe the special character (thin space) is what convinces the texvc machinery that HTML will not suffice, so it generates a PNG. Something like a fraction does the same thing without the magic. I always force PNGs in displayed formulas, and always avoid TeX markup inline.

Folks who do use TeX inline sometimes try the "\scriptstyle" incantation, to reduce the font size.

Not long ago we had to work around texvc to do multiline equations, so you will still see some markup done that way. Now we can use the "align" environment:

${\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}x&={}{\frac {-b\pm {\sqrt {b^{2}-4ac))}{2a))\\&={}{\frac {2c}{-b\mp {\sqrt {b^{2}-4ac))))\end{aligned))}$

For simple fractions inline, HTML offers a pretty solution: Combine a superscript, a "fraction slash", and a subscript. Much of the magic is in the kerning of the fraction slash, which is not the same as an ordinary slash, "/". Thus the well-known approximation π = ³⁵⁵⁄₁₁₃ uses the markup

• &pi;&nbsp;= ³⁵⁵&frasl;₁₁₃

Which reminds me, using a no-break space, &nbsp;, before the equal sign prevents a bad line break.

Isn't it fun learning and mixing TeX markup (with texvc not supporting half of TeX), wiki markup, and HTML markup? No?! Wouldn't it be great to just use blahtex and MathML? Yes! --KSmrq^T 07:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hah! Looks like I needs a notebook. I had the same guess about the \, but the \! is a very neat trick. \scriptstyle looks great too, (I used to force png inline and the result wasn't elegant(but was reverted)). Align will be quite a boon for some articles that I have worked on previously...assuming I can remember what they are. Hopefully I can write articles that pass the "Hardy new article test" now. :) In answer to your question, it borders on fun... but never quite makes it across. I rest in the satisfaction of finally getting something to look good despite the odds.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 08:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: Jimbo's page. I'm not sure that soap applies to talk pages. Rklawton 14:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oops, Well is there some other policy? I doubt anyone is going to read that.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 14:01, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not that I can think of. By deleting such stuff, we end up "feeding the trolls". Imagine their next newsletter reading something like "Wikipedia censors discussion..." etc. It's better to let them talk themselves out to an empty room than to try to shut them down - since shutting them down is difficult to distinguish from a conspiracy. Silly or not, you should consider restoring the edits. Rklawton 14:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If it's for the best... It just clutters the page so.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 14:08, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No need, it's been reposted by the original author. Rklawton 14:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just found that out :) I am going to apologize and suggest another venue.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 14:13, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ack! a new development... what to do now? It seems I have set a precedent.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 14:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chan-Ho Suh has become a redlink at his own request, per Right to vanish. Probably best not to inquire further under the circumstances, at least not in publicly visible places. --KSmrq^T 12:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh dear, I will erase my comment straightaway.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 12:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That oppose vote has been a controversial one. The user was not logged in at the time, and anons can't vote, I believe. I haven't been counting it. J-stan ^Talk 16:56, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, I just wanted to make sure that we had a proper count.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 16:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for adding the boxes, "resolved" tags and all that. It's the same difference as between an unfurnished and a furnished room - somehow much more comfortable. It also means you're exactly the person I need: at EMS's request, I have added a Work in progress page to general relativity. I'd like to have some big boxes at the top of the regular talk page (and possibly even one on the article page, if that is in line with wikiquette) proclaiming that this page exist, and should be used for test-driving major changes before we move them to the main article. Experienced with boxes as you are, I'd be grateful if you could somehow take care of this. Alternatively, I'd appreciate pointers on which box templates to use for doing it myself. Thanks in advance, --Markus Poessel 17:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are you ok with the changes?--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 18:56, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Splendid, many thanks! --Markus Poessel 12:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We seemed to have the same idea at the same time: you archived more boldly than I would have done, but yeah, be bold; it seems that there is consensus now at Boolean algebra. Geometry guy 21:56, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's been a while, but I see you have been having fun elsewhere. I stumbled across the talk page today and was both horrified and amazed, It seems I had found the home away from home of brilliant but long-winded mathematicians. Since it looked like they had worked it out I thought the heavy archive would be okay. --Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 22:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, please see Cantor/phil/relig. Thanks! Ling.Nut 01:55, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your comment. I imagine you had my typesetting effort on Group action in mind; please make it clear what you refer to when you decide to leave a comment. Fixing one section takes me an hour and a half; it is a considerable amount of time but I have not come up with a smarter method to do it yet. Ideally, the math coprocessor shoud be fixed to produce better results in HTML mode.

Do you moderate the articles on mathematical subjects on Wikipedia? If so, please take into account that the typesetting changes were made with fingers crossed — e.g. Konqueror has problems with displaying the content. Konqueror is free software and it is likely to be fixed; AFAIK the fix is already there but I am not sure whether the fix has made it into the installer yet. I am not following that issue any more because I switched back to Windows (accidentally). Probably not.

Yecril 09:31, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for participating in My RfA which closed successfully. I am honored and truly more than a little humbled by the support of so many members of the community. It's more than a bit of a lift to see comments on my behalf by so many people that I respect. I'll do my best to not disappoint you or the community. - Philippe | Talk 06:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Cronholm144! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. ^∆ 22:37, 24 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I knight you Sir Cronholm, you have been a fine squire, and I think you have learned the lessons of how difficult it is to be a knight. Hold up the standard and do not compromise, to anyone, friend or foe. Be just, be friendly, be good. Geometry guy 23:33, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Cronholm. I have a problem. I want to change the name of the category 'Category:Abel Prize laureates'. I want the new name to be 'Category:Abel Prize recipients'. How can I do that? Thank you. RS2007 09:03, 7 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will make the change using WP:AWB which makes things easier. Why exactly is this change necessary? --Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 09:35, 7 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You moved the navbar to the bottom of Wikipedia:School and university projects/ITESM Campus Toluca/Syllabus. This destroys the intended effect. We need to look for a different solution to the problem that you identified. Can you specify which words were being lost and on which browser? Thanks. --Richard 16:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hmm.. It seems to cut off the first table in my browser, but it could be an isolated event. I'll try to figured out a way to get it to parse without moving it.--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 21:24, 7 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Which browser are you using? --Richard 23:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The latest build of Mozilla on a laptop(OS=vista(buisness)). The table ends but the words run into the nav bar. I think it might be my laptop that is the problem, it sometimes cuts off things that my other computer won't. In any case, it isn't as big a deal as I first thought, it cuts things off only slightly and is more aesthetically displeasing than non-functional. --Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 00:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for removing the post from the pump for me, I was just about to do it, and I've already posted it in the admin section. =) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Падший ангел (talk • contribs)

No problem. An admin should respond shortly. --Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 06:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Cronholm,

How have you been? I've been feeling a little in the doldrums these days, especially since G-guy left. :( Another good friend dropped out back near the end of March, so I was a little better prepared this time, but still...I'm struggling to understand some difficult topics here and to keep my boss(es) happy there. Luckily, I still have my knitting; I can disappear into another world, brighter and happier, and re-surface hours later, with something to show for my expedition :) Hoping that life is being good to you, generous with both hands, Willow 13:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Willow! It's good to hear from you, to be honest wikipedia feels a little hollow for me since G-guy's departure.... His leaving coincided with my return from visiting old friends and parting always leaves a certain kind of emptiness in its wake. Here and there eh? That is complicated as well, school starts in 15 days, and this means a great deal of change. I will have much to do and I don't even know if the here can continue as it has been :( . I am tired waxing nostalgic/melancholic though. I tend to cycle through these kinds of things, wiki or no wiki. I think what I need a good book is to give me a pick-me-up. Suggestions? --Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 13:44, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P.S. hmm... "I can disappear into another world, brighter and happier, and re-surface hours later, with something to show for my expedition." This is true other things as well :) (although the brighter and happier is questionable at times, but this is true of any human interaction).

Hi Cronholm! I'm sorry for not replying earlier, I just was very busy with my sister and her two children, especially my elder niece — she's very young, but we have a great time together! :)

I'm not sure what would be a good book for you; perhaps you could tell me more about your likes and dislikes? I looked over your userboxes and had fun learning all about Bleach. I like Orihime, even without having seen her; grey eyes and orange hair are always a plus. :) I'll try to intuit something that you might like now; I can always refine my guesses afterwards.

I'm guessing that you'd like something cheery, but something different from what you usually read. Short stories are a good start, because if you didn't like one piece, you can always find another that suits your fancy better. :) Perhaps some happy short stories, like those of P. G. Wodehouse or O. Henry? If you'd like more thought-provoking short stories, Anton Chekhov is my favorite, although you might prefer Jorge Luis Borges as more mathematical. There are also some heart-breaking short stories from Oscar Wilde, such as The Nightingale and the Rose or The Fisherman and His Soul. For novels, you might enjoy The Pickwick Papers by Charles Dickens or (going out on a limb) Gösta Berlings Saga by Selma Lagerlöf. And then there are plays — perhaps A Midsummer Night's Dream?

If a book isn't enough, you could also try something very different. You could learn to dance the Argentine tango, or master a new language like Swedish (useful for your Nobel Prize), or volunteer in a soup kitchen; the world is wide open. :) Willow 16:16, 11 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS. I'd like to make animations of spherical particles moving around one another to illustrate some mechanics articles. Can you think of how to do that most easily? I was thinking of trying to learn Blender 3D, but the learning curve seems a little daunting. I'd like to be able to specify the trajectories that the two particles take. Any advice would be most appreciated! :) Willow 21:46, 11 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The tango is out, I couldn't dance to save my life. I have thought about Swedish, but for my PhD I think I have to learn German, Japanese, Chinese, Russian or French well enough to translate journal entries(I know Latin and Spanish...the two languages that don't work), so that will have to wait. The soup kitchen is a good idea and opportunities abound in LA for that kind of work. check out User:Kieff/Gallery. POV-ray might be what you are looking for. Kieff will probably do the animation for you if you ask. I have tried blender and you are right about the steep learning curve. I think I will start with Jorge Luis Borges, Anton Chekhov, and Selma Lagerlöf. I am glad you found Bleach interesting; it is one of my less advertised interests and I was surprised when I first took a liking to it. Orihime is clumsy, but thoughtful, kind, and intelligent... As for my previous reading interests (in no particular order): I think I have read every book by Orson Scott Card, Anne McCaffery, Brian Herbert, Robert Jordan, and Terry Goodkind. I have also read most of Tad Williams' books and quite a few of Isaac Asimov's, but the latter's library is so extensive that I don't have time to conquer it. I've read all of The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy books. Neil Gaiman, Terry Pratchett, Dave Berry, and Carl Hiassen. I've also muddled my way through some of Leo Tolstoy's and Dostoyevsky's works. Nietzsche, Hegel, Goethe, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Kant (ick), and many literature classics like A Tale of Two Cities and The Hunchback of Notre Dame. However I still haven't read the majority of them, like Jane Austen or James Joyce. I am sure that I left out a lot, but I think I have blabbed enough...;)--Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 08:08, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now I have a much broader reading list! :) I've only read a few of those authors, and even of them just a few works, such as Love in the Time of Cholera, which I liked a lot. The longer works of James Joyce scare me to death, but the short stories of Dubliners were pretty good. The novels of Jane Austen are wonderful, rich with conversation and observation, and are practically the archetypes of most romance novels. Most people like Pride and Prejudice, but I prefer the more bittersweet Persuasion. Opinions differ, but you might enjoy watching one of the recent movie adaptations first for easier reading.

I'm really happy that you warmed to the soup-kitchen idea. No doubt it'll be a strange world, but it's also the real one. Practicing practical compassion and empathy are usually good for both people involved, although surprisingly tricky, too.

Perhaps consider giving dancing a second try? It could indeed save your life, you never know. :) I think that if someone can walk, they can also dance. The main thing to learn is to keep putting your feet down in time to the music, ideally not on top of your partner's foot (but even that can be laughed off). Always look at your partner's face (not at your feet or other people) and talk to her/him. Then choose a direction to move in; if you lead, your partner will try to follow, and keep themselves close to you and oriented roughly the same way. Be nice to your partner and don't make them take overly large steps; their legs might be shorter and they might be restricted by their clothing. For example, when you're rotating, take big steps going forward and small steps going backward, since the two partners must cover different distances to stay together; distance increases linearly with the radius from the pivot point. :) You could start with waltzing (the only dance for 3/4 time) and swing; they're not too hard, I think. Don't fret overmuch about your form; just move with the music and be with your partner, and everything else will improve with practice. :) Willow 15:06, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dancing... I think I have been ruined by my middle school Cotillion. If only they had given me your advice, instead of forcing some of the most awkward interactions I have every had the privilege of witnessing. Unfortunately, the arena for traditional dances seems to be shrinking. The atmosphere at most high-school and college dances and parties is positively Dionysian; The core of these formations is filled with wild energies, a Heart of Darkness if you will. However, I think there is a community at USC that still dances in the traditional way so I might give it a another try under their tutelage.

Any luck with the images?—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 21:29, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, I forgot to mention that! I looked at Kieff's Gallery and was really impressed; it's definitely the sort of thing I was hoping for. I'm going to ask him nicely if he'd be willing to help me, or at least tell me what I should do with POVray. But I want to think through what I'd like before I ask him to do anything, so as not to waste his time — too much. ;)

I hope you have lots of fun with your local dancers! :) Willow 22:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am the author of the Zhou Tong article and would like to thank you for some of the work you have done to improving the page's lead image. I have recently fiddled with the pic on the old windows paint program and drew in a face that looks pretty good. Please see my comments here. Thanks. --Ghostexorcist 00:23, 11 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Based upon your excellent outlining of the original Zhou Tong paiting, I just downloaded inkscape, but I have no idea how to use it. How did you create the outline in the first place? Once you have the outline, how do you color it in? --Ghostexorcist 12:34, 11 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are some strange opinions floating around about announcing that editors are running for adminship. Some people will oppose a candidate if they feel that there has been too much canvassing of votes. We have managed to get by announcing RFAs on the math project page, but it's probably worthwhile to do so in a separate section and in a neutral phrasing ("Such and such is up for RFA. Please feel free to express an opinion.") — Carl (CBM · talk) 11:34, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear me, I certainly didn't intend to undermine anyone's RfA (I have no connection to the candidate, except that I voted at the RfA). When I saw his name on WT:WPM I remembered that he was up for adminship and decided to mention it (as he has at least some ties to WP:WPM). I intended to make light of the overwhelming support he seems to be receiving with my comment, but I can see how that might be viewed as an endorsement. I will watch my phrasing in the future (assuming there is one, I don't vote at RfAs all that often). —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 12:57, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've added a new reference image regarding these flags. It should be easier to deal with. Keep up the good work and sorry for being a pain in the neck. :) Valentinian ^{T / C} 20:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're not a pain. I wouldn't hang out there if I didn't want to help :)—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 20:43, 13 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You left an unattributed copyvio notice on my talk page. The reference page you left as the "source" of the material does not match the article that was deleted, as far as I can tell, so I'm wondering what the rationale was for the swift delete and the vio notice. Did anyone actually *read* the article, and compare it to the reference, or did everyone just jump the gun?  ◉ ghoti 17:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Twinkle error, there was an attribution, but I don't have access to it anymore. You could ask the deleting admin to provide you with the history. I am going through the backlog and I remember it being a pretty obvious copy. Did you obtain permission to use the material? Sorry if there was a mistake but it is better to be safe than sorry. The vio tag had been there for a while and I double checked before requesting speedy. —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 19:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey. Thanks for commenting. You said you think I need to watch what I say more. Could you give examples? Some of my comments are sarcastic to editors who know me well. So I would be interested to see if there are other instances where I didn't realize how I was coming off. If you're referring to the comments I posted in question 2, I know. That got out of hand and I realize that. Lastly, regarding expanding my horizons, I know that's something I need to do. I'd oppose my own RfA if it were... well, not my RfA. There's a lot of changes going on, but once the project has improved and the dust begins to settle, I'll be venturing out more. Again, thanks for commenting. I appreciate it. Best regards, Lara♥Love 04:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sill waiting for an answer to my question here, what's going on? --CliffC 21:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey! I noticed that you're a fan of the Redwall series. Would you like to come join our Redwall WikiProject? If you're interested, add your name to the Participants list. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions! GlassCobra 00:37, 19 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sounds good! You're more than welcome to add the project userbox to your page. Glad to have you aboard! GlassCobra 01:19, 19 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hiya Cronholm144! I have a question regarding "svg" images and lack of a set background. I've got bad eyes, so I invert the browser color scheme——white text against black background. If you compare these different versions of the same image, they look the same with a white background, but with the black background for the svg version, all you see is a blue outline:

Is there a way to fix this? There is a svg image,

that I think had the same problem, but now seems okay with the black background——? Any suggestion? ~Kaimbridge~14:20, 19 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If I may? The explanation is easy to see if you look at the image pages. Both PNG and SVG support transparency. On the image page, the image is displayed over a checkered background, visible through the transparent parts. A common practice (mistake?) is to use a fully transparent background rather than opaque white, which leads to the problem you describe. --KSmrq^T 23:54, 19 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Of course you may :). Does this answer your question Kaimbridge?—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:48, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I guess so. I figured it was something like that, I just never noted it with any GIF/JPEG/PNG images and didn't know if there was any setting in MediaWiki that would create a backing automatically. So far——anyways! P=)——all TeX images have a firm, white backing (some sites don't: I believe MathWorld was guilty of this, though they seemed to have fixed it fairly recently). ~Kaimbridge~13:53, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A slightly manipulated (by others) image for an excellent image manipulator. Hope college goes well, or at least the start. 68.39.174.238 21:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks so much! :)—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 06:07, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Give me a week to get situated. —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 06:06, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I dunno why, but stuff that apparently looks fine on everyone else's monitor looks very un-fine on mine. The Bezier Curve image on your user page completely overlaps the knightly order template... I played with it but did not save changes... If you put ((subst:clear)) immediately below each, and then delete the vast swath of whitespace betweeen the Bezier Curve and the rest of the page, it looks OK on my monitor:

((User:Minestrone Soup/template knightly|Honourable Knight))

((subst:clear))

[[Image:BezierCurve.gif|left]]

((subst:clear))

..try it and see if it works on yours...

Later! -- Ling.Nut 07:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done, hope it looks okay on all browsers now. —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 06:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Cronholm, hope all is well with you! Just dropped by to share some good news -- Ling.Nut 18:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hola Mentors!

Im sending you this reminder because you volunteered to mentor my students in English Advanced B as they become contributing members of the Wikipedia community. We start working with Wikipedia in earnest next week. I ask you to take a look at your entry in the Mentor Table at Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/Mentors

Please update the information, esp. with what your technical and informational expertise is or, if you have decided that you no longer want to participate, please remove your information from the table. Please watch the pages associated with the project. Students will contact you via your user page and as soon as my students have user pages, I will put them on the navigation bar associated with the project.

I don’t need to remind you that your job is NOT to write their assignments for them, of course. I certainly will tell my students that… and the fact that you are volunteers that don’t have to help them… so they need to be nice. If any students misbehave (tho I don’t expect it) don’t hesistate to contact me and I will take care of it. The goal of this project is to integrate successfully into the Wikipedia community. Anyway… what I really need your help with is helping students get oriented to Wikipedia, make appropriate changes and write about appropriate topics (see Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/Syllabus for assignments). I also need your technical expertise… I am only an English teacher after all! I appreciate what technology does for us but I am no technical expert!

Again, thank you for volunteering and you will hear from us again soon! Thelmadatter 20:10, 28 August 2007 (UTC)ThelmadatterReply[reply]

Hi, Wikipedia:Mathematics Collaboration of the Month looks like it could do with its next Collaboration. I seem to recal you were doing the leg work on this. Regards --Salix alba (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 08:59, 9 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. I left some comments on your curved mirror images at Talk:Curved mirror.--Srleffler 04:27, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I replied there—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 08:59, 9 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am trying to confine him to my talk page or his talk page until he understands what this place is about. If he goes off like that on someone else, I think he would be instablocked. Spryde 13:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Attention All Wikigraphists![edit]

As you may or may have not noticed, the Graphics Lab pages have gone under a massive cleanup by User:DTR, User:Rugby471 and various others (sorry if I missed you out). Some of the things that have happened are.

---

• All pages in the Graphics Lab have had, where sensible, templates, substituting elements. For example, the main Lab page was a large chunk of around 100 lines of pure code. It was not very easy to edit the main page, so the various sections of it (eg links, welcome) have been separated. Therefore the main page is now only around 20 lines of user friendly text. If you wish to edit the main page, you must look on the main page for the correct template to edit. (Fore example if I wanted to edit the links section, I would go to Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/links and edit the text there). This has been done to all of the pages, in an attempt to make them more user-friendly.

---

• As you were notified of early, the Wikigraphist Abilities page has been set up and has been beginning to get populated. If you haven't already setup your own entry, you are advised to go and do so now.

---

• Due to a comment from User:DTR. A template for Graphics Lab announcements has been created. It is at Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/announcement. If you ever need to issue a message to Wikigraphists, please use this template in the form

((Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/announcement|message ~~~~))

Where message is the announcement you wish to issue.

---

• On the Images to Improve Page, an issue was noticed where that when requests were completed, people were adding ((Did)) but forgetting to add <!--werdnabot-archive--&gt so that the request would be archived. Therefore a template has been created (yes another one!) to help with this. When a user creates a new request instead of putting the usual code, they shall put

((Request Title|title=Lorem Ipsum|done=false)). Now when a request is completed, all you will have to do is change done to true

done=true

and the template will add the ((did)) template and also <!--werdnabot-archive--> to the title, so it will get archived.

As always, if you experience any issues with the new changes, or are just a bit confused, please don't hesitate to contact me or DTR on our talk pages.

---

> Rugby471 ^talk ⚔ 11:32, 29 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Cronholm,

There is a typo in the following image:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Schwarzschild_circular_radii.svg

Instead of 'Schwarzschild' it says 'Schwarzchild'.
The 's' of 'schild' is missing.
--Cleonis | Talk 19:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 08:56, 5 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Sir C! I hope college life is fun. If you get a moment, could you take a quick look at Homotopy groups of spheres and update the maths rating comment? I am now too involved in the article to update the comment myself. Geometry guy 20:26, 20 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am in the process of reading through all the comments and the article itself, I'll update soon.—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 05:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, that would be great. I see you've switched off the annoying ad in your monobook.css. Did you catch my post on User talk:Jimbo Wales? I'm really annoyed by this move. Unregistered users don't even have the show/hide option, so they get a new quote with every page they visit. I think I'm going to start www.geometryguy.com, and add a link to it at the bottom of every page I have worked on: after all, I worked for free too, and I could use the money! Geometry guy 18:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I caught your post minutes after I noticed the ad itself. It is somewhat insulting that they expect the editors who donate hundreds of thousands of hours to the project to put up with an annoying marquee. I understand the reality of a 4 million dollar budget, but that is no reason to be tasteless about their fund raising. As for the geometryguy fund raiser, well, you'd be surprised what people will donate to. —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 00:48, 24 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks :) Which edits caught your eye? I'm curious. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 23:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Jimbo/Militopia/Zscout AN/I and the Sadi Carnot arbcom case. —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 06:47, 30 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• • Never mind, I just saw your revert of the revert :-)

But: please ban links going to "AfghanProfile.net". It is a VERY racist website with the worst hate speeches against Pashtuns that I've see for a long time.

Thanks, R.

Yikes, I don't know anything about the issues at hand, but I would agree that that site is very hateful in both its tone and message. Banning external links doesn't really happen unless they are being spammed, but then again I am not very well versed in this area either. You could drop a line at WP:WPSPAM if there seems to be a more pervasive problem. Sigh, that is the second stupid edit I have made today, but I guess that is the way it goes sometimes. Cheers —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 16:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries and thanks for the quick feedback. Alright, I'll look into that and see if we can get that website banned. Greetings, R. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrRiyadh (talk • contribs) 16:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have striken my oppose on this RfA. My oppose was never made because the candidate doesn't agree with my real worldviews. I shared the same concerns as Acalamari, but even so, it is irrelevant to how she would use the tools. Sorry if it came out as if I were opposing because I didn't agree with the candidate on everything.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 20:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem, your strike and comment there said all that needed to be said, the note here was not necessary, but definitely appreciated :). Most of the time people refuse to be swayed once they have taken a position. The 'pedia could use more people who are willing to genuinely consider what others have to say and reevaluate their positions (whether or not they decide to change their mind). We'd have a lot fewer edit wars, that's for certain. And sorry if I came off as trite with my "worldviews" thing. Cheers—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 22:02, 3 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are the closest Wikipeep I know. I attend Columbia College in Los Alamitos, finishing my degree in accounting. On another note, the 'dood' spelling is such a colloquial term in Orange County that I suppose I've just adopted it. The fires sucked, but that's really not an issue at the present moment. Good luck in school. Math, eh? I'm a big fan of the quadratic equation, haha. the_undertow ^talk 01:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cool, sorry for the belated response. I think there are actually quite a few of "us"(wikipeeps) here in SoCal, but I have yet to here of a meetup, which might be interesting. I am still getting used to the LA traffic though. I spent 3 and a half hours wandering around Beverly Hills hopelessly lost, I think I traveled a maybe 35 miles. Then again, I should have know better than to go out during rush hour traffic. Sigh... I think I am going to take up biking instead of driving, it's just too frustrating.—Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 04:26, 10 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I confess. --Ling.Nut 05:28, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are being a very fine squire Cronholm, watching and updating the counts on my RfA! I hope when this week is over, you won't forget you are actually a knight now! As Ling says, when the time is right, you would make a great admin. After all, you wield the sword of good faith, which is the highest honour in my book: I think the only other recipient is Ling himself! Geometry guy 00:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And perhaps yourself G-guy, your conversations with John254 have made my day, I don't think I have ever seen someone manage to strike the balance between defending one's actions and gracefully accepting an oppose at their RfA. In other news, it seems my little joke has has resurfaced on Willow's talk page. I just hope I haven't done incurable collateral damage with my original post. --Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 20:40, 13 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are most kind! As for the other news, I'd wager 50-50 that Willow's tongue was in her cheek there, so you might have been in for a trout slap were it not for the fact that Willow is just too nice to carry around trouts at the ready to whack people with ;) Geometry guy 20:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dearest Croholm144,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 137 supports, 22 opposes, and 5 neutrals. Your kind words of support are very much appreciated and I look forward to proving you right. I would like to give special thanks to The_undertow and Phoenix-wiki for their co-nominations. Thank you again and best regards.

Lara❤Love 06:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply] Credits: This RFA thanks was inspired by The Random Editor's RFA thanks which was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks.

--Cronholm144 18:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cronholm, thank you for making that graph. I really like it better than what I made using Inkscape and the internet graph maker (at right). I like it because it shows track banking much better than a simple line can. As it is public domain, I will try to see if I can add some labels to the image and put it on the AVUS page.

It's no wonder why they considered it such a dangerous corner -- look: http://img264.imageshack.us/my.php?image=1956vonfrankenberg02xf8.jpg (don't worry, the driver Richard von Frankenberg survived this crash).

Thanks again, Guroadrunner (talk) 03:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem, happy to help. If you have a problem just let me know. Cheers. —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 04:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Cronholm. Idk if you noticed, but the whole Afghanistan demonym thing blew up again when I thought we had a consensus. Was wondering if you'd look into the talk page, as well as my talk and Hurooz's. Bits of the debate are on each of them. Just wanted to have more people than just me and him discussing this. Thanks Carl.bunderson (talk) 00:15, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Brad can take a joke, and this is all that is was, and expected that he would revert it when he saw it - I'm astounded at the lack of a sense of humour some people here have. Ryan Postlethwaite 16:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Things on my agenda include Order theory, Ordinal number and Hilbert space, which are not GA standard right now but are currently GA. Hilbert space might be the most fun, because I expect if we started editing, others would join in — and you need to learn more about Hilbert spaces anyway ;-)

If you prefer process stuff, then you probably know I want to automate WP:PR and WP:GAN. Also Wikiproject ratings occasionally come under fire: I'd like to make it more clear that they are separate from the good/featured article process. Anyway, you can always email me with ideas. However, as my email is revealing, I'll reply indirectly until you solve the Knightly puzzle I left in July (or you can persuade Oleg to tell you the answer) ;-) 00:01, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Hilbert space huh? I'll start reading. As for the puzzle, I'll have to find the hint first, but I think I'll definitely have fun with this one. I must admit I did some sleuthing a while back based on your area of expertise, but I eventually gave up after going through several university's math faculty lists. I hope that you were able to help Oleg BTW.

Automation=good, my ability to be of help=nil. Regarding ratings, where is the fire coming from? Where should this clarification be made? Would there be any objection to simply BOLDing it? —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 00:36, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Enjoy! An example of the fire on WP ratings can be seen here. It is not completely clear how to clarify this: one option would be to ditch GA-Class as a rating, and (perhaps) replace it by Bplus, but that may be too radical to fly. Geometry guy 00:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Eww! That debate. I don't think that Bplus would receive support simply because it isn't widely used outside WP:WPM (that I am aware of). Have you talked it over with the GA guys? With their support the changes might come easier. I definitely agree with your understanding of the roles of the GA, FA, and wikiproject ratings, but I don't think everyone came away with that same understanding, which would be helpful when moving forward (and I realize now is the issue that you originally pointed out needed work, heh). I think a meta-discussion (VP + announcement maybe?)may be in order, but I fear that it won't yield much in the way of consensus. Still, it is a problem that needs an eventual resolution; what do you think is the best way to go forward? —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 01:41, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree. There has been some discussion at Wikipedia:Content review/workshop. Probably the best thing to do is to clarify the orthogonality at WP 1.0, and then promote it in other fora. Geometry guy 11:24, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Cronholm144,

Thanks for drawing my attention to the a discussion of a recent edit I'd made to Catenary!

As I wrote to Pleasantville, I've added to the discussion there; briefly, Hooke's contribution to the catenary is worth highlighting, but his eccentric anagram should not be featured so prominently—it's quite distracting, as Pleasantville noted.

Let's continue the discussion on the talk page; if you'd like to reply directly, could you drop me an email or write at User_talk:Nbarth#Catenary? Thanks!

Nbarth (talk) 00:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"so I don't think it's inappropriate for Giano to bring it up here." Neither do I. Rather, it is the way he brought it up that I believe is problematic. I hope you can understand my sentiments. Cheers —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 01:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries. Cla68 (talk) 03:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I saw the note you left about sockpuppetry on User talk:Kabul-Shahan2020.

• They redirected, without discussion, Talk:Mazari Sharif.
• An anonymous IP had redirected without discussion the main article about eight hours earlier.

If you are concerned Kabul-Shahan2020 is a sockpuppet, perhaps this IP should be checked against User:Kabul-Shahan2020?

I hate sockpuppets.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 15:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the pointer, I added the IP to the case. I hate socks too; they ruins the editing experience for people who are earnestly trying to do the right thing. Cheers —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 16:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just wanted to say thanks for helping me out with this guy the other day, and reverting his blanking of my user page.  :) Happy editing! GlassCobra 20:51, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I owe you a thank you as well for reverting the blanking of my user page. Happy holidays, happy editing, cheers and all that good stuff. :) —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 21:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whoah, that was reverted pretty fast, your like the armed response unit of vandalism crushes. haha.

Anyway, that was my first and last vandalism, and I bid you farewell kind sir.

Heh, nuthin' special. It just popped up on my watchlist and I reverted, more good timing than anything else. If you ever want to help out around here don't hesitate to create an account. Cheers —Cronholm¹⁴⁴ 04:24, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Expect it tomorrow evening... I'll work on it until late at night if I have to. Angel Emfrbl (talk) 22:00, 22 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your pictures on that subject in italian wiki. Unfortunatly for our italian traditions, spherical coordinates are usually inverted (θ ↔ Φ) and the relative equations refers to that conventions. So could you create a new picture for polar coordinates and replace that in italian wiki? Thanks a lot. Fstefani 11:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Cronholm

I see that you haven't edited for a while, but I hope to catch you when you come back! I wanted to send you a Xmas card, but I wasn't sure where to send it to; maybe you could e-mail your address to me? When you return, please fill me on what you've been up to; it seems ages since we last spoke! :(

I also have a favour to ask, do you mind? I've been planning on improving the articles related to planetary motion, and I've been trying to teach myself Blender, which I bet you've heard of.

After serious work, I succeeded in producing the animation at the left. The time dependence is accurate, I think; I wrote a little computer program to calculate the positions from the eccentric anomaly. But what should I do to improve the look? For example, is it too dark? Different colours? Once this animation is settled, I'm going to replicate it for several others, such as Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector, and everywhere we need an orbital precession image. So now would really be a good time to make suggestions. I would be super-grateful for any aesthetic critiques and suggestions for improvement. Hoping life's being generous to you with both hands, fondly Willow (talk) 09:56, 11 January 2008 (UTC) ==New Semester, New Appeal==This semester I am teaching academic writing to a group of teachers at my school. This course starts on Monday Jan 28. I would like to know if you are still interesting in "mentoring". You can see the syllabus at Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/SyllabusIf so, please leave a message on my talk page and update the mentor's page Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/Mentors, if . If not, please remove your name and information from that page. Thanks! Thelmadatter (talk) 00:26, 25 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You received this message because your were on the old list of WikiProject Physics participants.

On 2008-06-25, the WikiProject Physics participant list was rewritten from scratch as a way to remove all inactive participants, and to facilitate the coordination of WikiProject Physics efforts. The list now contains more information, is easier to browse, is visually more appealing, and will be maintained up to date.

If you still are an active participant of WikiProject Physics, please add yourself to the current list of WikiProject Physics participants. Headbomb {ταλκ – WP Physics: PotW} 14:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image:--Iran.svg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Iran Scout Organization 1970s.svg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Iran Scout Organization 1970s.svg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:35, 8 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

yo dude its drew- drop me a line sometime —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.4.67 (talk) 07:57, 6 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I'm posting this on your (and other members of the Maths Wikiproject) talk as we need editors who are knowledgeable about Mathematics to evaluate the following discussion and check out the editors and articles affected. Please follow the link below and comment if you can help.

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_review_-_uninvolved_admin_request.

Thankyou. Exxolon (talk) 18:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How's it going?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2010_Gubernatorial_Election_Map.svg

Hi, don't know if it's worth switch, but from July 3 to July 26, Alask with have a retiring Republican governor. Then after July 26, it will have a incumbent Governor seeking re-election.

Also, another odd case. Right now, there is not election is Utah. But if and when Jon Huntsman, Jr. get confirmed by the U.S. Senate as U.S. Ambassador to China, then there will be a special election for Governor of Utah and the then-incumbent, Gary Herbert, will be seeking re-election. So guess it's a bit of a heads up. Cladeal832 (talk) 19:41, 5 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:The Scullery Maid (L'Ecureuse).jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your upload of File:Bring radicals cartoon.svg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:20, 25 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[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) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Greetings, Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018 India) is a proposed workshop funded by the Wikimedia Foundation, to equip users from the Indian community with the skills to illustrate using Inkscape and similar tools. This is basically the first of its kind workshop. So we've opened up an open discussion on Meta-Wiki about the selection criteria for participants. As you've a quite decent experience in this area, your opinion will be very helpful. Please given your comments at m:Talk:Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018_India)#Ideal participation. The discussion will be open until the end of 25 May 2018. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 11:44, 22 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Cronholm,

I've returned to Wikipedia — if but briefly, due to good, but taxing, real-life obligations — but I noticed that you had also returned to Wikipedia a few years ago. While I'm here, I wanted to leave you a message in a bottle, to say how much I enjoyed our collaborations on Wikipedia all those years ago. It was lovely and a happy time for me, and I hope for you as well. Perhaps you'll discover this message in a few years and let me know how you've been doing? (Our common friend knows how to contact me irl, if you'd like.) Hoping life has been generous to you, Willow (talk) 06:40, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]