User talk:Jorgecarleitao

navbox

Hi, i work on a navbox for ways of obtaining science in two related field, scientific method from philosophy of science and dikw pyramid from information science. i need help of some people like you to finsh this,

you can see a prototype of navbox in my sand box: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:KPU0/sandbox Plutonium 16:15, 21 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by KPU0 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Justin P. Wayoro

Hello. You are one of four editors who inspected/declined Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Justin P. Wayoro for reasons other than blatant copyvio. This article was merely a bunch of text cobbled together from various sites. Step one in reviewing an article for creation should be to dump a string into google to see if it is a copyvio. If it is, the text should be immediately removed and an inspection of any images should be undertaken. In this case, the style of writing should have set of all sorts of copyvio alarm bells in your mind. Cheers, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:17, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Your userpage

Please move it to a sandbox. It appears as an article. Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:19, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

I support Anna Frodesiak.--Pratyya ^{(have a chat?)} 09:58, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

I was not sure Other users could change the content of the sandbox. Anyway, since it was not changed for some time, I moved it. thanks, Jorgecarleitao (talk) 10:03, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Odd behavior in article Multicanonical ensemble

Hi. The last edition from this "wiki feature" changed the order of the citing references in different places on Multicanonical ensemble article. E.g. it changed "" to "", which is non-sense since the order of citing references in general matters. (In this case the first reference was a general book, the second was a specific paper.

Furthermore, it took a lot of changes regarding different aspects of formatting. It would be clearly a much better approach to make one "commit" for every different formatting topic. I was checking all the changes, and it is annoying to have to check all different kind of things on the same diff. For instance, there were some changes that I didn't even understood what they were for, and the commit comment of the "feature" was only "WP:CHECKWIKI error fix for #61. Punctuation goes before References. Do general fixes if a problem exists. - using AWB (8855))". Sorry but I'm not willing to lose time to read all the general fixes of this bot, and see if it respected those...

I'm reverting this commit and do all the things by hand I consider relevant on it. This commit is not a "minor change" (a random change in citation order is not minor).

Other than this, keep up the good work! Jorgecarleitao (talk) 08:35, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Moved discussion here as you took it to the wrong spot. WP:CHECKWIKI is designed to find mistakes and not fix them. If you think it is an error done by AWB, then goto Wikipedia talk:AWB, else take it to the bot owner's talk page.

1. Only two main things were changed: Ref order and punctuation.
2. Order of refs. When two or more refs are used, they go in numerical order to ensure they appear in increasing order. Thus I changed the ordering to [1][3][4] from [3][1][4]. This is how all Wikipedia articles should be done. I'm not aware of any referencing system that says books go first then journals, but they all say works are numbered in order of initial appearance in the text.
3. "WP:CHECKWIKI error fix for #61" was given first because this was the reason the bot visited the page. Punctuation goes before refs and not after per WP:REFPUNC.
4. "Do general fixes if a problem exists" is given because there may or may not be a general fix error.
5. It does all of the general fixes at once per consensus. People decided that it was not possible to do each separate error and they didn't want 20 bot summaries over the space of a couple days when one would do.
6. "minor change" was given because it only changed syntax and not content per WP:MINOR.
7. You are not the first to issue this complaint now with the opposite complaints. The bot has done things according to MOS and consensus. If you feel the bot has done anything not according to MOS or an error has been made, leave a message at Wikipedia talk:AWB.

Bgwhite (talk) 06:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey Jorgecarleitao; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:29, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Zack Norman bio

You commented on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Zack Norman so I wanted to let you know I found more sources and I think the guy is notable. However, I think the article needs to be trimmed per WP:NOR and expanded with not-so-flattering material per NPOV. Binksternet (talk) 02:47, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wang and Landau algorithm, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Python (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) 14:19, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/testForBot

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page that you created was tagged as a test page and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:31, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Wang and Landau algorithm

Hi Jorgecarleitao, you changed the article in this edit [1]. In my opinion it is not consitent with the original Wang and Landau algorithm: the fraction ${\frac {g({\boldsymbol {r}}'\rightarrow {\boldsymbol {r}})}{g({\boldsymbol {r}}\rightarrow {\boldsymbol {r}}')}}$ in $A({\boldsymbol {r}}\rightarrow {\boldsymbol {r}}')=\min \left(1,e^{S-S'}{\frac {g({\boldsymbol {r}}'\rightarrow {\boldsymbol {r}})}{g({\boldsymbol {r}}\rightarrow {\boldsymbol {r}}')}}\right)$ does not occur in the original Wang-Landau algorithm. Where does it come from, is it correct? --129.69.120.39 (talk) 11:56, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Wang-Landau algorithm is an extension of the multicanonical (or flat-histogram) method to compute the unknown distribution. As such, it requires detailed balance. In the original formulation of Wang-Landau, the ratio of g's was not considered because they it is equal to 1 in the Ising model with single spin flip. The general formulation requires g'/g to ensure detailed balance as discussed in "A Guide to Monte Carlo Simulations in Statistical Physics By David P. Landau, Kurt Binder". Hope this helps. Send me an email if you have further questions.Jorgecarleitao (talk) 12:14, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I downloaded the book that you referenced to from http://el.us.edu.pl/ekonofizyka/images/6/6b/A_guide_to_monte_carlo_simulations_in_statistical_physics.pdf and had a look at it. So far the algorithm there does not include the transition probabilities, see page 276 and following. Could you please give a more precise citation where the Wang and Landau algorithm occurs in Literature like it is described in the article now.--129.69.120.39 (talk) 14:00, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I'm deeply sorry, I really though I had saw it in A guide for MC simulations from DP Landau, but you are right, it is not there, which is odd. Below is a list of references (I'm author of the the last reference)

* Borrero, E. E., & Dellago, C. (2010). Overcoming barriers in trajectory space: mechanism and kinetics of rare events via Wang-Landau enhanced transition path sampling. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 133(13), 134112. (See passage from Eq. 25 to Eq. 26)

* Shell, M. S., Debenedetti, P. G., & Panagiotopoulos, A. Z. (2003). An improved Monte Carlo method for direct calculation of the density of states. Journal of Chemical Physics, 119(18), 9406–9411. (See paragraph following Eq. 2.4)

* Leitão, J. C., Lopes, J. M. V. P., & Altmann, E. G. (2013). Monte Carlo Sampling in Fractal Landscapes. http://arxiv.org/abs/1302.4672 (See Eq. 5)

g is the proposal distribution. if it is symmetric the fraction disappears.  Biggerj1 (talk) 13:26, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

File:Histogram.pdf listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Histogram.pdf, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:50, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 14:30, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Jorgecarleitao. 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)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Jorgecarleitao. 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)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Jorgecarleitao. 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)