Limit-theorem

Across several wikipedia pages the relationship between economics and finance is very poorly described and obviously not written by users with advanced experience in economics or econometrics. I anonymously updated (deleted) several sentences in the page that describe the relationship between mathematical finance and financial economics. These statements were/are not supported with links or citations. They are not accurate statements as they do not reflect the practices of modern macroeconomists and financial economists. The questionable statements about the relationship between financial economics and mathematical finance do not add value to the definition on the page.

You should post on the talk page of the topic, not mine.Limit-theorem (talk) 17:00, 9 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Dear Professor Limit-theorem, I edited (anonymously)the page on `Professor' a couple of days ago. You undid everything I had changed or added. Maybe my edit was clumsy. I've now created an account and supplied my email address.

Surely it's clear to anyone working in a university these days, that the entry on Wikipedia is at least thirty years out of date. It describes better days perhaps. The use of `colloquial', to describe the term `professor' in N. American usage is not really accurate. If one is an Associate Professor, then in the N. American system one is a species of professor. (But when a students says "Hey prof." that is indeed correctly described as colloquial.) This is a small point, but the article is very misleading in this and other ways. For example, when many departments in middle rank UK universities have between a third and half the staff at full Professor level, the `big-beast' description is simply not credible. On the other hand, my remark concerning senior management is accurate and points to an important problem. This practise debases the title. There are numerous university presidents/vice-chancellors or whatever, who actually have very few academic achievements. I have worked under two like this, and am aware of others through conversations with colleagues, over the years, working in other universities. We all want Wikipedia to be an accurate and up to date encyclopedia so, perhaps you might think about how to address the failings of this entry on Wiki. Friend of all the world (talk) 20:25, 22 September 2020 (UTC) Friend of all the worldReply

Hello "Limit-theorem", I see that you use the personal criterion “Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that can be consulted by students” so you “fix anything that departs from such a criterion”. Can you accordingly please explain to me how this applies to describing the provision of a requested citation as “Apparent vandalism”, or the grouping of real life individuals in a different section to that which pertains to fiction as “Apparent vandalism”, or the apparent novelty of a "non-academic" who takes the title of professor when relating to college students? Other people clearly accepted my edits and there is some separate discussion of this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse?markasread=226753441&markasreadwiki=enwiki#What_is_%22constructive%22? Protestant Revival (talk) 07:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

These edits may not be "apparent vandalism" and my descriptor may be inaccurate. But the repeated reintroduction of these elements incongruent to the page and not helpful in an encyclopedia may deserve some administrative attention. Limit-theorem (talk) 10:04, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your reply. There appear to be three parts of the article that need supporting references ("citation needed"), as flagged up at the top of the page, so I supplied one that was requested with an additional recent and apparently novel example that is also backed up by supporting references (I can't help with the other two examples that I can see). What would you suggest to make the article less incongruent? Would it be better to relegate the "Fiction" or real-life "non-academic" examples to a separate article? If you don't feel you can address this directly, I would be grateful if you could please direct me to someone else whom you think might be better placed to do so. Protestant Revival (talk) 17:37, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Please refrain from using my talk page for these arguments; use the talk page of the entry instead. Limit-theorem (talk) 20:49, 1 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Why do you keep removing my changes regarding academic ranks for librarians? I have cited the best recent article on the topic to back up my edits regarding the percentage of librarians with academic rank, and my goal was to help readers (and especially potential librarians) who may want more information about this topic.

Also, the assertion that "the head librarian" (1950s terminology) is especially likely to have academic rank is contrary to the policies of many state universities, which make a clear distinction between faculty and administrators. Arguably, the "head librarian" is LESS likely to have academic rank at those institutions due to his or her administrative role, and two of the largest state systems (PA and MN) specifically exclude the library director from holding academic rank. Admittedly, I'm not aware of a peer-reviewed paper that addresses this particular point.

Please restore my changes. If not, I'll be glad to use this article in my information science class as an example of the ways in which Wikipedia departs from scholarly norms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.182.45 (talk) 00:10, 10 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I was looking for a teacher of Finance, with the idea that teachers would have more exp. explaining the non-technical aspects than would practitioners. I know you're in quant rather than general finance, and I am sorry to bother you, but you're the closest I could find. I'm looking for help with Black Monday (1987), which I've put a lot of effort into recently. [Right at the moment I need a good one- or two-paragraph summary of the global bull market ca. 1982–87, but any and all would be appreciated.] Know anyone who might be interested? BTW, Mandelbrot apparently had things to say about the intersection of chaos theory and the crash (yes, I looked at your recent contribs to see if you are still active). Cheers! ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 02:16, 3 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Sarouk7 (talk) 15:30, 31 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

WikiProject Finance & Investment April 2022 Newsletter   Hi! Welcome to the April newsletter of WikiProject Finance & Investment. This is our first regular newsletter and has plenty of exciting announcements. You have received this because you added yourself as a participant to the project, but will only receive future newsletters if you sign up for the mailing list; see below for instructions on how to do so. April Drive: The month-long April Content-creation Drive is now underway. The drive's target is to improve Wikipedia's coverage of financial markets. Awards will be given to everyone who improves or creates at least one article in the topic area. Sign up here! New layout: The layout of the WikiProject has been greatly improved, with a navigation bar being added to the top of every page and separate pages for assessment and edit requests, templates, resources, and news. Come take a look! Signing up for the newsletter: To sign up for future newsletters about upcoming drives, recent promotions, and other miscellaneous topics, add yourself to the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Finance & Investment/Mailing list. You will then receive them in your talk page regularly. Thank you for participating in the WikiProject. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 22:02, 17 March 2022 (UTC)Reply To unsubscribe to this newsletter please go to the mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:32, 1 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

WikiProject Finance & Investment May 2022 Newsletter   Hi! Welcome to the May newsletter of WikiProject Finance & Investment. This is our second regular newsletter. You have received this because you have been added to the mailing list; see below for instructions on how to unsubscribe. April Drive finished: The month-long April Content-creation Drive has now concluded. Our first content drive was a great start for what will be a regular feature of our Wikiproject. We will be doing them every other month, so there's none for May, but I look forward to seeing you sign up for the June edition. The drive's target was to improve Wikipedia's coverage of financial markets. Awards were given to those who participated. June Drive topic for discussion: We're currently brainstorming topics for our June Content-creation Drive. Join the discussion here. Content work: Two articles in our purview have received DYK nominations. Real Estate Bank of Arkansas was created and nominated by Hog Farm and Ranchlander National Bank was created and nominated by Sammi Brie. They're currently running in the WikiCup, so good luck to them! UBS has been nominated for a Good article reassessment. If you wish to help, leave comments in the nomination. Thank you for participating in the WikiProject. — Ixtal ( T / C ) ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 10:22, 29 April 2022 (UTC)Reply To unsubscribe to this newsletter please go to the mailing list page.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 3 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

WikiProject Finance & Investment June 2022 Newsletter   Hi! Welcome to the June newsletter of WikiProject Finance & Investment. This is our third regular newsletter. You have received this because you have been added to the mailing list; see below for instructions on how to unsubscribe. June Drive: The month-long June Content-creation Drive is now underway. The drive's target is to improve Wikipedia's coverage of stock exchanges. Awards will be given to everyone who improves or creates at least one article in the topic area. Sign up here! Content work: Two articles in our purview have received DYK nominations. Google Wallet was created and nominated by InfiniteNexus and George D. Gould was created and nominated by Ktin. Ktin is currently running in the WikiCup, so good luck to him! UBS's Good Article Reassessment is still ongoing. If you wish to help, leave comments in the nomination. Cheque was selected as an Article for improvement on May 16 for one week. You can see the improvement during that period here. Thank you for participating in the WikiProject. — — Ixtal ( T / C ) ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 07:53, 1 June 2022 (UTC)Reply To unsubscribe to this newsletter please go to the mailing list page.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don't see you can't put something in the article accrediting Heaviside to reactance. He influenced Stienmetz to use complex numbers in circuit analysis. Heaviside explains how the circuit actually works, and although he was not the inventor of reactance, he used reactance to explain the ionosphere and how wireless radio works. This is why reactance should be in the article. Heaviside used reactance to explain Maxwell's equations. If Heaviside is accredited to Maxwell's equations he should also be accredited to reactance.

If you don't believe me, it is in the book "The Forgotten Genius of Oliver Heaviside." You also might want to read Heaviside's electromagnetic theory. That is a primary source. After read both sources, there is no drought in my mind that reactance and Heaviside making that term popular, should be in the article. K00la1dx (talk) 18:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I’m reaching out because I see you are a project member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Finance & Investment so you might be interested in a proposal about one of the biggest crypto-currency companies in the world. some corrections. Would you possibly be willing to have a look at the items in that proposal? Thanks very much in advance for your time. CertifiedTurtle (talk) 15:54, 8 June 2023 (UTC)Reply

Please see WP:ROLLBACKUSE, which gives a pretty clear set of uses under which rollback use is permitted, which this edit pretty clearly didn't fall under. Thank you. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:17, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Hello, I'm Usedtobecool. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Mathematics and Statistics have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please, don't mention NNT's illness on Wikipedia, not even if it isn't in mainspace. His illness is not public knowledge. I noticed you mentioned it (not merely the illness but the particular disease and the anatomical part which was afflicted) at least twice. Once was in the edit log for his BLP yesterday. You also mentioned it in an edit log in the past. I don't recall where or when but I can find it if needed. We should never disclose such unsourced sensitive information in BLPs, even if well-meaning, i.e. it may have negatively impacted his hedge fund's performance in 2004.

In your most recent edit to his BLP, you removed an entire sentence and sources. We need to include the sentence for continuity, as it provides the reason (a period of low volatility resulting in 3 years of slightly negative returns) for his hedge fund closure. It is sourced to the WSJ and Institutional Investor. I am not going to revert you, but I will reword the sentence with sources, and retain the content you added. I will duplicate the second paragraph of this message on the talk page of the BLP where it belongs. If you want, we can discuss further there, as can other editors, if necessary. Thank you.-- FeralOink (talk) 12:18, 5 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, message registered. Mentioning a low volatility environment is not correct, becomes OR. Best to remove causation. And continued with Universal which uses the same strategies. Limit-theorem (talk) 18:02, 5 August 2024 (UTC)Reply