User talk:CiaPan/arch2: Difference between revisions

User talk:CiaPan archives:

arch1 (Jun 2005 – Mar 2016)

arch2 (May 2016 – Jan 2020)

current

Thanks for your help. I thought I saw something weird after I saved since I seemed to remember a question below mine and planned to check the history but then got distracted and forgot about it, whoops. (I think I got some sort of weird hidden edit conflict as had accidentally browser away without saving and had to go back to when I got an error as one of the sites is blacklist.) Nil Einne (talk) 09:40, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: that was about this edit [1] and the fix [2] --CiaPan

Thanks for explaining sandbox sharing. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 08:40, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I ♥ beer [🇺🇸 COACH Z | #USNavy ⚓] 23:23, 3 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by COACH ZARLINO (talk • contribs)

Hi, just a quick note to let you know I undid your edit to User talk:Gopatholabs - {{Db-nouser}} does not apply to user pages where the user has been renamed recently. We normally leave these redirects in place for quite some time before tagging them. Thank you for your contributions -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 08:28, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you asked a question on my talk page and I thought I had gotten back to you but the answer is: I don't know. This would be a good question for the help desk (or what we really need is someone who can read that language and tell us what it says.) RJFJR (talk) 14:44, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

mysandbox

I am using voice recognition and apologize for any grammatical or syntax errors in advance.

This page was modified about 5 years ago on my handheld device I am seeing a comment from you but I cannot read it so I know it's probably on the desktop version not my mobile version that is in my hand.

What did you say to me?

Amish:Portal

Do you know any Amish people in Poland?

Moved here from User:CiaPan/Sandbox. --CiaPan (talk)

Good morning I am using voice recognition to respond to your edit I familiarize myself with the use of the website and understand it is not a Blog social media site a web page while blah blah so on and so forth however I have a Wikipedia project that needs attention of Wikipedia editor's that have subject matter expert information aansocial settlements for the Amish people in the United States of America like the community in Sarasota Florida.

I am a subject matter expert on the social settlement in the historic Middlefield Village Geauga County in the great state of Ohio.

I personally have moved my residence to that Community to study and report on how the Amish culture uses the internet without getting in trouble with the religion they believe in because they understand that they have to use the internet so they hire people like me to do it for them for a fee.

Unfortunately all of the rules on Wikipedia are very clear on not being able to promote your business unless other people write about it first.

You by virtue of editing my talk page are now by default a news agency media publication agency digital marketing agency because your edits are seen on the 10th largest website in the world launched by Jimmy Wales.

I am looking for Wikipedia editors that are interested in starting the Amish portal on Wikipedia because the Amish people don't use the internet.

There's a joke out there that many famous comedians use saying it's fun to make fun of the Amish because they don't use the internet and will never read my jokes.

If you have any information or time to help me with my project I would appreciate it. Thank you in advance coach zarlino. -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 11:18, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from user page -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 11:18, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everybody,

I request a merge of Talk:Satyarup Siddhanta to User talk:Chic500 because that is exactly the initial part of that user's talk page. The user made a draft article as their own User: page, so when moved to the Draft: space, it took the user's talk to a Draft talk: space. Hence should be taken back and merged at the top of the later (i.e. current) User talk: page.

--CiaPan (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:CiaPan - Why did you make cosmetic edits to my talk page to the reply that had been written by Peterb1234 and had then already been signed by SineBot? I don't think that your edits made any important change to the page, but they made it necessary for me to read the page history to see what you were trying to say to me (which was nothing, because the job of signing Peterb1234's post had already been done by SineBot)? Did you want to discuss something, or were you just trying to improve the formatting of my page? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:28, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Same here on my last discussion... Not a really necessary edit because the problem I had was already solved, so... Oxygene7-13 (talk) 13:05, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not 'same' because that was not 'your discussion' (in contrast to Robert's user talk page). It was a discussion at Wikipedia:Help desk. Yes, you have started it, but it's not 'yours' – it is in a public space. And others may well benefit from having a link exposing the reason and a solution for such problem. So... EOT. --CiaPan (talk) 14:46, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do not necessarily blaim you for it, it's just that I do not understand why, since there was already a link included. Oxygene7-13 (talk) 16:37, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chronocinematograph, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SwisterTwister talk 22:07, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Marcial Solana González-Camino, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liaño. 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) 09:44, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

•  Fixed special:diff/779164262. --CiaPan (talk)

I have been told that we can customize link colors but I have never succeeded in doing this. You told someone that in the case of a redirect, they would see a green link saying "Redirected from ..." but of course if that person was a newcomer they would not know how to customize link colors. For most of us, that link would be blue. I'd like to have those customized colors myself.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:43, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Vchimpanzee: I have answered at your talk page. --CiaPan (talk) 20:52, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help with the pictures! Bokorember (talk) 08:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you have correctly identified the book. Sloppy of me to miss the title. Monstrelet (talk) 09:41, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(error spotted special:diff/306376166 & editor notified special:diff/783883415, error fixed special:diff/783900394 5 June 2017)

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thank you so much, CiaPan for the editing help. Theaphorist (talk) 12:21, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:26, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CiaPan! I hope you're having a great day! I noticed that you reverted my edit to this page, which restored content that was removed without an explanation. Your reversion which removes this content again - was also made without an explanation. Why did you remove it? What is the issue that warrants the removal of this content? I didn't see any issues with it, but I may be wrong - did I miss something? ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:35, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Oshwah: Hi. Please see the article history.

On June 19 User:Waldo is here has added a section about TAMA to the Thymus article. However, as an unexperienced editor, he (or maybe she?) put it in a wrong place and with wrong section level (three 'equals' instead of four), thus spoiling the structure of the article a bit (Special:Diff/786380262).

The next day he/she decided to move the section to a more appropriate place. However, instead of moving it in one edit (did I mention s/he is an unexperienced editor?), s/he first removed the misplaced part (Special:Diff/786523265) and the same minute added it back in a new place (Special:Diff/786523310).

You have reverted the 786523265 in the middle of Waldo's two-stage action, just before 786523310. As a result the article contained TWO copies of the same section, one of them in a wrong place (try searching for ‘TAMA’ in oldid=786523310).

Hence I have reverted your reversal to restore the article to a shape I suppose the author intended. If you think I misunterstand the article structure (medicine is not my area) and the article should contain the section twice, please revert once again.

In case of further ambiguity we can ask Waldo_is_here for explanation. :)

Best regards. --CiaPan (talk) 10:04, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reply seems accepted: Special:Diff/788140437 :) CiaPan (talk) 16:00, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sorting out the EUFORGEN page. I would like to make a link from the original version in English https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Forest_Genetic_Resources_Programme to the Polish page on the side. However, when I try adding link, the error message says there is already a link to that page and there cannot be another one. THis is just a Polish version of the page, so it should appear on the left menu. Please explain how to do that as I'm planning to add translations in other 20+ languagues when the pages get created. Dzieki!!! Ewa hermanowicz (talk) 19:06, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your help Ewa hermanowicz (talk) 19:11, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on reverting the undo that I did: "Worst case sum (n-1)+(n-1) which will overflow if n exceeds a half of a maximum value representable by integer type)". That should have been worst case sum (n) + (n-2) (due to the check for < 2 elements). For signed integers, this could be a potential issue as noted. I was thinking of unsigned integers when I undid the change.

Bottom up merge sort has the same potential overflow issue in it's for statement sequence of operations: width = 2 * width, then check for width < n. I'm wondering if the sequence should be check for width < (n+1)/2, then width = 2 * width, but this assumes n+1 can't overflow.

I seem to recall an old discussion about leaving the overflow checks out of the examples as their purpose is to describe an algorithm while avoiding getting into architectural specific issues, but that discussion isn't there anymore and I don't know how to search the archives for it. Rcgldr (talk) 00:04, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please feel free to add anything that will help this community. Please and thank you. [🇺🇸 COACH Z | #USNavy ⚓] 14:42, 10 October 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by COACH ZARLINO (talk • contribs)

(The above is a reply to my proposal at Coach Zarlino's talk page, 10 October 2017. --CiaPan (talk) 12:15, 17 October 2017 (UTC))[reply]

https://www.fb.com/hashtag/yum_yum_yum 🎂 [🇺🇸 COACH Z | #USNavy ⚓] 03:56, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood the reason for my edit in Darboux's Theorem Special:Diff/810026267. I am not claiming that ${\displaystyle f}$ is not a Darboux function. I am claiming that ${\displaystyle f}$ does not fit the given description of "a Darboux function that is discontinuous at one point", because ${\displaystyle f}$ is continuous for all ${\displaystyle x\in \mathbb {R} }$. Instead, its derivative ${\displaystyle f'}$ fits that description. Bill Shillito (talk) 22:44, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CiaPan. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

...was funny. Best Regards, Barbara ✐  ✉ 14:47, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(In archives: Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2018 March 11#Correct info on page --08:19, 13 April 2018 (UTC)]

Didn’t know if you were aware of User talk:CiaPan/Sandbox being created, seemingly by accident. Thank you for your patience in dealing with this user, it seems you have done everything possible to try and get through to them and help them. Unfortunately I don’t think they are really able to contribute effectively here no matter how much guidance they receive, but it was well done nonetheless. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:44, 18 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Beeblebrox. Yes, you're right, I tried to help COACH ZARLINO as much as possible, although I was having the feeling his mission does not exactly fit Wikipedia rules. Even though I actually admired his determination and his efforts in struggling his disabilities, I was afraid it would end that way. Wikipedia claims it is 'an encyclopedia anyone can edit", but editing Wikipedia is actually a complicated task. I can't even imagine myself navigating Wikipedia without my sight, let alone editing it and discussing with other editors! When you add a slightly personal and promotional approach of the user (his commitment to popularizng Amish community) and an immanent inability to provide proper references (resulting from inability to read published paper sources), that was a mission impossible. I am really sorry it ended that way, but I think his plan was doomed. --CiaPan (talk) 08:16, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BTW. I don't think the Sandbox subpage you mentioned is worth keeping, so I've put {{Db-u1}} at it and I hope it will get deleted soon. Thanks for the note. CiaPan.

Category:Meteorological phenomena, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.--Srleffler (talk) 03:29, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Miscellaneous desk question "Hotel stay legal question", which is timestamped "23:31, 30 November 2017" is filed under December 1. It is consequently impossible, when viewing the December archive, to navigate back to November. Can you fix this? 156.61.250.250 (talk) 12:20, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for undoing my recent change to the article. By vacuous falseness of statements involving "there exists ξ ∈ A or B" if A or B are empty, the proof goes through perfectly well if A is empty, as occurrence of the contradiction would be automatic! (Ironically, I had written the text of the boxed proof, but looking at it last night, I thought that there was a problem with the way it stood. A moment's reflection made it clear that there was none.) Obviously, I don't often thank people for reverts.... Alsosaid1987 (talk) 20:48, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Alsosaid1987: Thank you for your comment! --CiaPan (talk) 20:13, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CiaPan! You created a thread called How to switch a new watchlist off? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey CiaPan, September misses you!

Thanks for those regular monthly updates. -- ToE 00:33, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thank you for the reminder! --CiaPan (talk) 06:22, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CiaPan! You created a thread called Two questions on Wiki Ed page at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CiaPan. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CiaPan. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, discussion pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stott's Theorem of The Pictorial Condition, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Even making spelling and grammatical corrections in others' comments is generally frowned upon, as it tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Pontificalibus 13:25, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pontificalibus: Which edit exactly do you mean? --CiaPan (talk) 14:17, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was this one. I assumed initially that User:Dan_Van_Carloads added the tags themself, which implied to me that they had a better knowldge of Wikipedia than would initally appear from their postings, suggesting they were perhaps a sockpuppet, and also that they were trying to make some sort of point.--Pontificalibus 17:03, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your edit on User talk:Oshwah did not revert vandalism, instead it re-added a large number of spamlinks (check the edit...) that were originally added by a now blocked user Mmnassim, and removed by JJMC89, so please make sure you know what you're doing... - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 12:01, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reviewing the VPP draft

You edited the draft [[Draft:Vector_Packet_Processing|VPP Draft] with the following issue.

"removing https://fd.io as a linkspam – the project's homepage by itself does not confirm any of the information given; specific sources needed"

A summary of VPP is described when you click on the technology section of the FD.io main site. Doesn't this confirm the information given?

Jdenisco (talk) 18:44, 11 February 2019 (UTC)jdenisco[reply]

Hello, CiaPan/arch2. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by David Biddulph (talk) 11:04, 28 February 2019 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Thank you so much for your help re: my question. I hadn't even thought of moving the page.

CdbgLaurie (talk) 20:44, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for the extra info on page numbers in references. The question is archived now so I couldn't reply in the Teahouse but wanted to let you know I saw your answer and it was helpful. MadScientistX11 (talk) 21:33, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]