User talk:Darij

Edit summaries: Publishers' urls
Hi Darij!

In your last two edits, to the Bombieri norm, you summarized replacing "crap links" with open-source pdf files. I humbly suggest your substituting "publisher's url" for "crap links" in the future, to help others understand your (permanent) summaries.

It's great that you found free sources for the articles, of course! Keep up the good work!

Best regards, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 22:17, 3 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Kiefer, thanks for bringing this up. I am not aware of the writing style preferred on Wikipedia changelogs (of course I wouldn't ever write anything like that in the actual articles), but it is better to err on the safe side. "Publisher's URL" isn't entirely correct, though - JStor is not a publisher. -- Darij (talk) 22:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Darij!
 * No problem, and I appreciate your JSTOR/publisher distinction! (I myself have been cautioned for calling some literature in economics "crap" in edit summaries, and discussing an economic claim as "BS" on a talk page, I confess!) However, in this case, my warm feelings towards JSTOR prompted me to write!
 * Best regards, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 23:37, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6
Hi. When you recently edited Ado's theorem, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hochschild (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:08, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Unitary ring vs Unital ring
Actually, the adjective "unitary" is not restricted to Hermitian forms as you think. If you look at googlebooks for example, "unitary" is used 75% as often as "unital", and on googlescholar, it is 85% the usage of "unital". The term "ring with identity" dominates both of these severalfold. Rschwieb (talk) 00:01, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Seems true indeed, although I have never seen "unitary" used for "unital" before. I still think my corrections were good, since "unitary ring" is also being used for functional-analytic properties and structures, while "unital ring" seems free of such connotations. -- Darij (talk) 00:42, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * That's OK, I think the change is a positive too. But it kind of helps us put in perspective how sometimes things an individual has never encountered can be really quite common. Consulting something easy like googlebooks or googlescholar is a good way to gauge decisions for edits like that. Rschwieb (talk) 12:57, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Resultant
Hi,

I appreciate your recent edit of Resultant. IMHO, this reveals again that the article is badly structured, with the most usual definition at the end and the very specific case of algebraically closed fields as the main definition. I have this opinion since a long time, but never got the time to make the edits, I have just added some important but yet (incomplete) lacking information, like the mention of multivariate resultant and of subresultants. If you are willing to restructure the article, I'll happy to help you, for example in discussing unclear choices.

Sincerely D.Lazard (talk) 07:29, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
As I see you're not a frequent contributor, so you probably (like me) don't use a watchlist, I thought to leave you thank-you note for the (mostly correct) observations you've left at Talk:Binary tree. JMP EAX (talk) 20:45, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)