User:AnnekeBart/archive2

Apology and explanation
I'm very sorry if you perceived my comments at WT:WPM as obstructionist. On the contrary, I actually agree with you that Milogardener has committed serial original research of the worst kind, and I think your efforts have been commendable. I hope that you don't leave the project, but I understand if you do. Dealing with troublesome users is an enormous waste of time for everyone, and has always been among the leading causes of attrition. I myself have been driven away more times than I would care to admit.

My reason for requesting more clarification there was to try to make it more obvious to everyone that Milogardener is committing original research. This will ultimately be one of the tasks to perform in the RfC/U. The line "In RMP 41, Claggett mentions..." seems to be a reference of sorts. If you could address this sort of thing directly by saying why this is an unsupported interpretation, rather merely that it is, it would probably help outsiders see more clearly what the problem is. I think I'm familiar enough with Milo's style of inference at least to guess that this is original research, but other members of the community will not be.

I'm sorry I haven't had more time and energy to devote to this issue recently. I will make it an immediate priority (although I'm not an administrator). Sincerely, Sławomir Biały  (talk) 11:31, 14 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Just coming out of the closet as one of probably many maths editors who looked at the article talk page, felt that this must be OR, but didn't feel up to the task of arguing the case and helping to get the problem solved. It's good that you have expressed your frustration, as it is likely to increase the priority with which this is handled. Hans Adler 11:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Note for Dr. Bart
Dear Dr. Bart,

In my edit on Ramesses I, I noticed that someone had once said that this person had "five sisters and three brothers who were named Pay, Minamon and Hawnefer" among others (I assume), Then I saw an IP vandal some time ago change Minamon to 'Me' as in 'I'...and no one caught it. If Dodson and Hilton do not mention any known brothers or sisters for Paramessu/Ramesses I, please just remove this sentence out. Its better than having a disputed clause because Dodson & Hilton is a reliable source.

As for me, I was once very active in making edits and rearranging the chronology and giving verifiable references for the Egyptian pharaohs and their reigns. Maybe you have seen that many of the article on the Egyptian kings are referenced and have well written sections...compared to say the very minimal information for Hittite/Babylonian kings for instance here. I think my best article is on Ramesses IV personally. For me there are few 'edit wars' on Egypt's rulers unless it is Ramesses II, the Battle of Kadesh or the Great Pyramids of Giza. I let Doug Weller take care of the last topic since it attracts so many pyramidiots. Since mid-2009, I have been mostly active at Wikimedia Commons (WikiCommons) than at Wikipedia due to my poor health and all the edit wars here wore me down a bit. I am trusted there to mark (pass or fail) images based on their license. (And no, there is no Egyptian art where I live in Vancouver...unlike Toronto) If you are interested, here are some nice photos which I sourced from 2 people on flickr who agreed to license some images copyright free for some wikipedia articles here or here I always ask people on flickr will you be willing to license an image copyright free...and change the license. Some people are open, some are definitely not and some are willing to relicense just 1-2 pictures for wikipedia...and no more. Anything is better than nothing, I suppose. Today, its impossible to get any good pictures since the Egyptians ban picture taking in all their museums and their tombs. As an aside, keep up your good work on EEF where I am also a member (though not a very active one) today. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:47, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you. If you can verify some information on Ramesses I's brothers/sisters, then feel free to add references. It would be appreciated. If not, just delete the sentence on his (presumably unknown) siblings. As for whether you wish to remain here on wiki or not, that is a personal decision. As for me, I became a bit tired of wikipedia in mid-2009 and edited less and my personal health became poorer. But I had accomplished my main goal of writing good articles for Egypt's kings. So, I was content and edited less on wikipedia but did not quit. I am glad that my friend in Toronto Captmondo helped make the Rosetta Stone a featured article...although it has little to do with Egyptian mathematics. Well thank you. Best Wishes, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:20, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Kahun Papyrus and RMP 43
The removal of Robin-Shute's (8/9)^2(d^2)(h) cubit-cubits = (2/3)(8/9)^2(d^2(h khar = (32/27)(d^2)(h)khar from the Lahun Mathematical Papyri page mentioned an error. Any error would have been a typo on my part. I hate typos. Looking closely at Robin-Shute's algebraic information is not:

V = (3/2)[8/9]^2(d)^2(h) khar = (64/81)(d)^2)(h)?

Adding back (d/2)^2 for radius r in A = pi(r)^2, is not A = 256/81(r)^2 the modern and ancient area of a circle?

Returning to the issue at hand, proceeding in the other direction, following Robins-Shute's algebra, is not

V = (3/2)(8/9)^2(d)^2(h) khar (used in RMP 42)

equal to

V= (192/162)(d^2)(h)= (32/27)(6/6)(d^2)(h) = (2/3)(h)[(4/3)(d)]^2 (used in RMP 43 and the Kahun Papyrus)?

Best Regards,

Milogardner (talk) 15:18, 19 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I have rewritten the section and tried to give a short explanation. I added the information into the article. --AnnekeBart (talk) 22:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)