User talk:Binary198

Welcome!
Hello, Binary198, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at the our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.
 * Article development
 * Standard layout
 * Lead section
 * The perfect article
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions ask me on my talk page or you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! JW 1961 Talk 19:06, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ultimate, solid and gargantuan cardinals
Hello, Binary198,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Joseywales1961, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I have tagged Ultimate, solid and gargantuan cardinals for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. You may find our guide for writing quality articles to be extremely informative. Also, you may want to consider working on future articles in draft space first, where they cannot be deleted for lacking content.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion] but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. If the page is already deleted by the time you come across this message and you wish to retrieve the deleted material, please contact the.

For any further query, please leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

JW 1961 Talk 19:06, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ultimate, solid and more types of cardinals


A tag has been placed on Ultimate, solid and more types of cardinals requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time.

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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:11, 1 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Re - this . WIkipedia isn't for things you've made up. Such entries as the above will always be deleted.  Acroterion   (talk)   19:44, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sbiis Saibian


A tag has been placed on Sbiis Saibian, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the. Jack Reynolds (talk to me &#124; email me) 14:10, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Links to user pages and sandboxes
Please do not introduce links in actual articles to user pages or sandboxes, as you did at Large countable ordinal. Since these pages have not been accepted as articles, user pages, sandboxes and drafts are not suitable for linking in articles. and such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been deleted, please do not re-add any such links, thank you - Arjayay (talk) 13:21, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * You're welcome Binary198 (talk) 13:22, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Binary198

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Binary198! Your additions to Large countable ordinal have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 12:40, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

August 2021
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:Liz, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 12:42, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Um what did I do I don't remember doing anything lol Binary198 (talk) 13:22, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Large ordinal list
I like the idea of color-coding the sizes of ordinals! However, the list seems to have a few errors: And something I don't understand why: C7XWiki (talk) 02:58, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
 * $$\alpha-1$$ is undefined when $$\alpha$$ is a limit ordinal. So we can't say things like "$$\varepsilon_{\omega-1}$$"
 * We should also be careful about ordinal tetration, since cases like $$\omega\uparrow\uparrow(\omega+1)$$ are non-trivial to fix. If we take the repeated exponentiation approach of natural number tetration, we get $$\omega\uparrow\uparrow(\omega+1)=\omega^{\omega\uparrow\uparrow\omega}=\omega^{\varepsilon_0}=\varepsilon_0$$, which isn't much use. Things like Bowers's climbing method are artificial attempts to circumvent this problem by manually setting how ordinal tetration behaves for arguments such as $$\omega+1$$, $$\omega2+1$$, etc. but there is no single agreed-upon way to circumvent the problem
 * $$\omega_1\neq\mathbb R$$, since these are different sets (for example, $$\omega^2$$ is a member of $$\omega_1$$ but not $$\mathbb R$$). When assuming Continuum Hypothesis, the cardinality of $$\mathbb R$$ is $$\omega_1$$, but ZFC can't prove this
 * The proof-theoretic ordinal of KPM unfortunately isn't $$\psi_\Omega(\varepsilon_{M+1})$$ using Rathjen's ψ, but $$\psi_\Omega(\chi_{\varepsilon_{M+1}}(0))$$, and this ordinal is strictly less than $$\psi_\Omega(\varepsilon_{M+1})$$ (I don't remember the source for this inequality). If we need an OCF in which $$\psi_\Omega(\varepsilon_{M+1})$$ may be equal to $$\mathrm{PTO}(\mathrm{KPM})$$, maybe Buchholz's OCF from "A note on the ordinal analysis of KPM" is a candidate (not to be confused with the OCFs commonly called "Buchholz's ψ-functions", these collapsing functions reach much further past the Takeuti-Feferman-Buchholz ordinal.)
 * Not an error, but for clarification it might be good to add that (+)-stable ordinals and $$\Sigma_1^1$$-reflecting ordinals are the same ordinals
 * Weakly Σ2-admissible - I don't know what "(weakly)" means in A Zoo of Ordinals, but according to MarekSrebrny1973, $$\beta$$ starting a $$\Delta_2$$-gap necessarily needs $$L_\beta\vDash\Sigma_2\mathrm{-coll}$$. And in Devlin74, it's claimed that $$\eta_2^\beta=\beta$$ implies what is essentially "$$L_\beta\vDash\Sigma_2\mathrm{-coll}$$", and also $$\Sigma_2\mathrm{-coll}$$ will imply $$\Delta_2\mathrm{-sep}$$ (source, "$$\Delta_n$$-separation holds in every $$\Sigma_n$$-admissible set"). So I don't know how tight Madore's claim of "least $$\beta$$ s.t. $$L_\beta\vDash\Delta_2\mathrm{-sep}$$" is
 * Thank you very much for the constructive criticism (you're referring to the stuff on my website, right)! :) I will definitely take that into account. I didn't know that (+)-stable ordinals and $$\Sigma_1^1$$-reflecting ordinals are the same ordinals, and I kinda doubt it, but I believe you :) Binary198 (talk) 08:58, 3 September 2021 (UTC)Binary198
 * About your edit on my talk, I remember you by the way C7XWiki (talk) 22:09, 25 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Yay you are one of my favourite googologists (you got me with the I0 cardinal OCF rickroll thing btw) Binary198 (talk) 09:49, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Buchholz hydra for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Buchholz hydra is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Buchholz hydra until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Waddles 🗩 🖉 21:42, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Explicit mathematics moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Explicit mathematics, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 21:00, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

New analysis
Something you might find interesting is the new analysis of KP+Π1-collection, AFAIK this is the new state of the art! LinkC7XWiki (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I had a brief look at it once, but I never read it properly. I will have look at it, although the link you sent didn't work :/ I managed to find it though with a bit of googling. By the way, recently I created a shrewdness OCF, can you please have a look at it? Binary198 (talk) 18:43, 15 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry, this is the correct link. I'm looking at your Shrewdness OCF today C7XWiki (talk) 23:44, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Explicit mathematics
Hello, Binary198. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Explicit mathematics, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 09:01, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Explicit mathematics


Hello, Binary198. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Explicit mathematics".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 21:15, 21 April 2022 (UTC)


 * It's fine. But thanks for letting me know. Binary198 (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2022 (UTC)