User talk:Entropeter

Pi
Hi Entropeter, Thanks for your references for the use of "pi" in 1697 by David Gregory. I don't have access to the books, so would you be able to check for me that his use of pi is the ratio of circumference to radius (and not to diameter as it is now). If it is, then perhaps we should add a note to explain this to avoid confusion. Thanks.  D b f i r s   07:51, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * ... (later) ... Sorry, I've found it now, and you were correct. I've added a bit more detail.    D b f i r s   08:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Dbfirs, Thanks for providing these details. It would be most interesting if we could identify other mathematicians that used the constant 6.283... rather than 3.14159... I guess that Euler was such an important mathematician that everybody after him used pi to denote 3.14159..., but it would surprise me if David Gregory was the only one of that time to be interested in the circumference divided by the radius rather than the diameter. EntroPeter 11:42, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for improving the text with links. If I find anyone else who used circumference to radius ratio, I'll add the details.    D b f i r s   12:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Eyes and turns.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Eyes and turns.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 18:13, 18 May 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:13, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Circle constant


The article Circle constant has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * The term "circle constant" does not seem notable. The article does not attempt to establish notability and in my professional experience I have never encountered the term.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ozob (talk) 02:56, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Sodomize
In the article on the death of Moammar Gaddafi it was stated that might have been "sodomized". Later in the article (under Cultural Impact) the same incident is referred to as "poked or stabbed in the rear". In order to be more precise, more neutral and more consistent I changed "Sodomise" to "poked or stabbed in the rear", but you changed it back without giving any reason for that. You just mentioned that my change seemed unconstructive, but you did not change the second reference to this event. There are several reasons for my change. The notion of sodomy is unprecise. The first of all we do not know precisely what happened in the town of Sodoma. The second is that the whole concept is religiously flavored. The religious interpretation might be different in Arabic contriesand English speeking contries. The third is that what happened might not fit well into the definition of Sodomy as given in the article on Sodomy ("anal or other copulation-like act, especially between male persons or between a man and animal"). Maybe Gaddafi was already dead when this event took place and if that was the case what happened may should be described as "dishonoring a corpse". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Entropeter (talk • contribs) 16:41, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I initially reverted the edit because - at first glance - the edit appeared to be vandalism. "Being poked in the rear" and similar sentences are often vandalism, so when seeing the change i reverted it as such. Had i taken a better look at the context of the edit it should have been clear that, in this case, the change is of course entirely fine. Add the above explanation to that, and i would say that the change is actually for the better.


 * In short, my mistake here, and it seems to be the second mistake on that day (At least the second someone gives me a nudge about) - I guess it would be wise for me NOT to try vandalism patrol when feeling sleepy again, since the error ratio seems to go into the unacceptable area. For what it is worth, apologies for the mistake and the incorrect warning. I reverted my edit to the article, as the "vandalism revert" rationale obviously does not apply there. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 19:03, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Khamis Gaddafi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sabha (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) 10:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

British vs english spellings
I appreciate your dedication to accuracy, and I'm sure you were not aware of this, but in the Libyan articles we have been mostly using british english spellings over american english, with some small exceptions. So defence and criticised are actually correct in the Saif al-Islam Gaddafi article. I have gone ahead and changed them back, but just a note for the future :) Jeancey (talk) 23:09, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Bani Walid
Hey, I appreciate your strive for accuracy, but please don't remove sourced information just because it turned out that it might not have been entirely accurate. If there is another source, replace the current one, and change the text to reflect that the rumour turned out to be incorrect, but please don't simply remove a reliably sourced statement. Thanks! Jeancey (talk) 07:26, 25 January 2012 (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) 14:00, 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) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Edit-war
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Turn (geometry). Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:09, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
=Iyas ibn Qabisah al-Ta'i= Hello, could you let me know where you got the information that he was granted 30 villages along the Euphrates please? This edit. Best regards. 90.203.188.69 (talk) 17:36, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed 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 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)