User talk:Lfahlberg

Transwiki

Hello, I'm Citrusbowler. I would like to notify you that I nominated a page that you created, Linear function (mathematics) to be copied to Wikiversity. Please take the time to voice your opinion on the talk page. Thank you. Citrusbowler (talk) (contribs) (email me) 19:00, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Linear function (mathematics)

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, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Linear function (mathematics). First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – Linear function. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Linear function – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. It's a Fox! (What did I break) 22:54, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia. I've noticed the discussion you started at WikiProject Mathematics about the various uses of the word "linear". Your comments have already resulted in positive changes; for example I much prefer the way Linear function is written now, compared to a week ago. As you (and many others) have pointed out, most of the mathematics articles on Wikipedia are not user friendly for non-mathematics. I think the main reason is the amount of time is takes to write a good, user-friendly article, that also satisfies the correctness demands of a large cross-section of readers and editors from different backgrounds. This takes a lot of time and effort, and we are only a small number of volunteers. So if you could work with us to improve Wikipedia's articles, it would be much appreciated! Thanks! :-) Mark M (talk) 10:18, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your statement that some editors here have very different goals to you, I had a look at some of the Macedonian articles you've been working on (such as mk:Допуштени вредности (математичко образование)), and it appears possible that you might be more interested in one of Wikipedia's sister projects, like Wikibooks (in particular, http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Subject:Mathematics). The people you find here are devoted to creating a free encyclopedia, which is different in many ways from, say, a free textbook (hence the first of Wikipedia's five pillars). Anyway, I hope you decide to stick around. :-) Mark M (talk) 16:44, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Text on images

Hello. You recently said that you can change almost anything anybody thinks needs changing in PNG images. The first homework will be:

replace hyphen-minuses with minus signs wherever a minus sign is assumed;
change variables’ letters to the proper style and face.

I comment the latter in details. First of all, sans-serif letters are not used (professionally) in mathematical formulae, except very limited occasions, and certainly are not used for variables. Also, variables’ letters should be italicized. Throwing sans away and enabling italic would be already sufficient, but cursive-like fonts, such as MathJax_Math, have a better look than usual serif x (this has much lesser importance, though).

I hope, you know how to upload new versions of an image to Commons. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:28, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. only names of variables should be italicized! Symbols may not be italicized. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:29, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Constant function

Hello. Although WP:be bold is an important principle, you should be aware about already known problems that plague your editing in Wikipedia. Your [1] edit features the following irregularities:

A navigational item ({{polynomials}}) removed without explanation.
The link to a Wikimedia Commons category removed.
The categorization changed contrary to guidelines, namely: a non-existing (red-linked) category and an upper-level category: Mathematics.
An external link (PlanetMath) removed without citing policy or consensus relevant to this matter.
Inserted formulae littered with Cyrillic homoglyphs of Latin letters. You was already warned that it is contrary to the established typographical style at all. Moreover, here is English Wikipedia and a reader is not expected to read Cyrillic script in any form.
The edit summary to a serious edit was not provided. It is literally empty. Of course, neither was anything posted to the talk page.

This is far from a comprehensive list of all problems in your edit. These are just things that an experienced editor should not permit at all to happen (at least, should quickly fix it). This time I tried to fix the article myself. Henceforth, if I spotted your edit with a half of things named, or analogous to those, then I’ll simply revert it. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:11, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hang in there

I saw your comments at the math project and ANI. Choosing not to escalate at the latter was the right decision, but also an uncommon decision as well. If you've figured that much out after ~100 edits, you'll do fine here. Happy to have you aboard.

Here are a few bits of trivia that might be useful.

1. Putting "WP:" in front of mysterious acronyms in the search box gets you to internal policies, documentation, and commentary on both. A few of the more common ones: WP:RS, WP:NOT, WP:MOS, WP:AGF, et cetera, et cetera.

2. The wikipedia teahouse (aka WP:TEAHOUSE) is set up to answer questions of newer users in a forum where the more-experienced editors go out of their way to be kind. I've found that to be a great place to go for my questions that start with "I know this is probably stupid, but....". I found that hanging out there and answering questions was also a good sanity-check on what I was learning elsewhere.

3. I will say that having a Ph.D. makes editing articles in your field a little more difficult. We're used to being able to wield the authority that our credentials provide, and that just doesn't work here (for both better and worse). Definitely read WP:RANDY, and for more practical advice WP:Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia (targeted towards academics).

Feel free to drop me a line if you have questions.

Best, and welcome!

Lesser Cartographies (talk) 06:52, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you for your kind note. The WP: thing is good to know and I will visit the teahouse. Lfahlberg (talk) 09:03, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment about the universe U at Venn diagram

I agree with your concern and addressed it in some detail. Thanks for the observation that the notion is missing in the article. Bill Wvbailey (talk) 15:56, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]