User talk:Geometry guy/Archive 31

MfD nomination of User:Geometry guy/Calculus
User:Geometry guy/Calculus, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Geometry guy/Calculus and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Geometry guy/Calculus during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Magioladitis (talk) 17:25, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

YGM
You've gots an email. :) — Ched : ?  20:33, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Belatedly replied. Sorry for the 5 month delay! Geometry guy 14:18, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Precious again
  treatment of editors as human beings

Thank you for voicing the right of every editor to be treated as a human being, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (21 April 2009)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC) (About) a year ago, you were the 44th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style, - did you know that I framed your words on my user and remind everybody and myself in my edit notice? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:56, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes I did - how could I forget? Thank you again for your kind words. Geometry guy 14:18, 10 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I didn't know about the edit notice, because I installed that much later. The reminder is still needed, see another thread in WP:Great Dismal Swamp that could be short and easy if only ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:51, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Would you comment on Map Projections?
Hi, we have an ongoing disagreement on the Map Projections page and I was hoping you'd weigh in given your mathematical bent. Here's the current dispute: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Map_projection_discussion. Appreciate any thoughts! Thanks.184.186.8.148 (talk) 23:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Alas I was unavailable for this - I hope you sorted it out. Geometry guy 14:18, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Rumours of my inactivity have been somewhat exaggerated. I wish you the best in your future endeavors also, MadmanBot, and hope that electromagnetic fields continue to bend to your will. Geometry guy 14:18, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre
{||}


 * Good luck with this initiative. Ironically, I never did sign up to WGA. Echoes of Marx, I guess (Groucho, not Karl). Geometry guy 14:18, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Just to let you know -- Missing Wikipedians
You have been mentioned at Missing Wikipedians. XOttawahitech (talk) 14:33, 24 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for the notification. Rumors of my disappearance have been greatly exaggerated. Geometry guy 23:46, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, tutti santi to you! Sandy Georgia (Talk) 23:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

'tis the season
 * You may enjoy this then: Louisa Venable Kyle wrote a children's book on The Witch of Pungo ;) - Good to know that at least one of the people quoted in my editnotice is still in sight, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:47, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Cartan formalism
Re your comment on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cartan_formalism_%28physics%29

What do you mean by a Poincare fiber? It sounds like spacetime multiplied by a little Goldberg Sphere at each point, but I get the feeling it's more complicated than that...

166.137.101.174 (talk) 09:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)Collin237


 * I don't see where I said "Poincare fiber". By "Poincare group" I mean the semidirect product of the Lorentz group with spacetime translations. What is a Goldberg Sphere? Geometry guy 20:32, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Proposed change to Consensus for a unified approach to bias categories at Category:Antisemitism
Due to your involvement in the 2011 CFD that decided on a unified approach to bias categories, you may be interested in a current proposal to change that approach with regard to the Category:Antisemitism. Dlv999 (talk) 15:38, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Belated thanks for the notification. Geometry guy 20:32, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Google books quote
Template:Google books quote has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:22, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * The original and best. They don't make google books quoting templates like that any more. May it rest in peace. Can someone please organize a wake? Geometry guy 22:42, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasons greetings...
...just in case anyone is watching this page, or happens to stop by over the festive period!

May your Yule be Cool and your Hootenanny Hot. Geometry guy 22:48, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Well lookie who's here !!!! Was just dropping your name the other day, although I can't recall where or why.  It's wonderful to "see" you, and I hope you have a wonderful holiday and a joyous year!  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:43, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Memory: one was at Education noticeboard/Incidents/Archive 4, and the other was Featured article review/Euclidean algorithm/archive1.  For a Very Merry Christmas, read this (before they spike the eggnog): "The Euclidean algorithm is a basic tools for proving many fundamental properties of the integers, such as Euclid's lemma, Bézout identity, the fundamental theorem of arithmetic. It is also used, directly or through its consequences for many advanced results, such as the classification of finite Abelian group. It allows to compute modular multiplicative inverses, and is therefore used for the classification of finite fields and for the computation in these fields. As a large part of modern number theory uses finite fields, the Euclidean algorithm is indirectly used in many deep results, such as the Wiles' proof of Fermat's Last Theorem."  Cheers!  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:48, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Season's greetings to you too; hope to see more of you this year. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:10, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for stopping by, here and below, and Happy New Year. Euclidean Algorithm clearly fell into disrepair, but it looks like it is getting fixed now. Geometry guy 00:21, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Global account
Hi Geometry guy! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with. Cheers, —DerHexer (Talk) 23:50, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Cartan connection
Hi GeometryGuy. I see from the talk page at Cartan connection that you stand out among the contributors and commenters there as somebody who really understands what's going on. Therefore for the moment this private message here instead of a comment on that talk page. Of course one of the causes of many people's confusion here is that would-be authorative sources such as notably Sharpe's book make what should be a clear statement become much more mysterious than it ought to be. At one point this still affects the entry: Sharpe has this curious way of stating the definition via Cech cocycles (aka "gauge transitions") without stating the cocycle condition for the transition functions itself. Instead he considers the effective situation where they are uniquely fixed already by the local 1-form data and then switches from Cech cocycles to Ehresmann connection data for the general case. But in the Wikipedia entry on Cartan connection it would be better to state this correctly, by adding to the paragraph "via gauge transitions" the cocycle condition $$h_{U V} h_{T U} = h_{T V}$$. Urs Schreiber (talk) 00:25, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and good point. There is so much still wrong with that article I can hardly bear to look at it again. Please go ahead and fix it if you have time. I will take a closer look when I can. Geometry guy 22:42, 22 December 2014 (UTC) PS. You do great work at the nLab.

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in more than one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e. as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised, that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions, and that you have not been inactive for a three-year period of time). If you remain inactive for a three-year period of time, including the present year you have been inactive, you will need to request reinstatement at WP:RFA. This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. MadmanBot (talk) 00:30, 25 March 2016 (UTC)