User talk:Joel Brennan

A belated welcome!


Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Joel Brennan. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Questions, or place help me on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Wikiacc (¶) 21:01, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Semicolon needlessly complicated?
I see that you replaced a semicolon by a full stop, with the remark "needlessly complicated punctuation". I hereby register my surprise; I find a semi-colon a very appealing way of continuing smoothly to a closely related thought. But you need not fear edit wars: I do not care as much as that! PJTraill (talk) 20:08, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't get me wrong, I love a good semicolon as much as the next Wikipedian, and to be honest I probably overuse them. It was just that the semicolon I replaced seemed particularly unnecessary and a full stop seemed far more appropriate. In fact I think it was the first semicolon I've ever disagreed with. You're right though: it was a very insignificant edit; I'm just very nit-picky. ;;;;; Joel Brennan (talk) 20:37, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

A couple notes
Just a heads-up about an edit of your I just reverted. First, wholesale changes of "nonempty" to "non-empty" shouldn't be made per WP:STYLEVAR (and possibly WP:ENGVAR); both are valid spellings. Also, adds semantic meaning to italicization of words for emphasis and should be retained. Thanks, –Deacon Vorbis (carbon &bull; videos) 19:07, 1 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Noted. Thank you. Joel Brennan (talk) 12:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

At the moment, we're still capitalizing Internet
Hi Joel. I noticed that in the sleep deprivation article you had changed "Internet" to lowercase "internet". We had a very lengthy discussion / RFC about this last fall with the outcome that at the moment we will continue capitalizing "Internet" in Wikipedia, even though several style guides changed to "internet". The Request for Comment to change was ruled "no consensus" with 30+ editors participating. The convention is to let some time pass before going through another RFC process, but I suspect sometime this year or next it might come up again - at which point the voting might be different. But right now we're still using "Internet"... so I'm just going to revert this last change you made - but I wanted to explain why I was doing so. Thanks for your contributions to making Wikipedia better! - Dyork (talk) 01:28, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Valuation ring
About your recent edit on the article; you are correct. I misunderstood the meaning of the edit (and thank you for the detailed edit summary). Good job on spotting the error. —- Taku (talk) 16:07, 12 May 2022 (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) 01:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

improving Constant-recursive sequence
Thanks for the helpful edits at Constant-recursive sequence! :)

I've been meaning to try to get the article to GA status. Do you have any thoughts on what improvements the article needs to get to that point? Caleb Stanford (talk) 14:46, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Excessive linking
Hi I see that you are adding a lot of wikilinks to mathematics articles. Overall it may be ok, but we should not overdo it either. Different mathematics articles are written at different levels; some of them are geared to beginners, while others are more specialized and meant to be read by people with the requisite background and will not be (and don't need to be) understood by beginners lacking that background. Thus, in more specialized articles there is no need to overlink it, no need to create links to really basic mathematics terms.

Just to give one example (but I think the same would apply to other edits of yours too) for an article I am more familiar with: Exhaustion by compact sets. You added a link for union. The particular article in question covers an advanced topic in topology. Anyone reading this article will have an interest and a basic knowledge of topology already. If they don't know what a union is, they are really not the audience for this article. Therefore there is no need for this extra link; it does not add anything to the understanding of the article as far as its audience is concerned. In contrast, in a more basic article like topological space for example, there can be and definitely should be a link to the "union" article. It all depends on the level of the article.

And one could make similar comments about other links like reverse implications, etc. PatrickR2 (talk) 17:23, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 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 2023 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) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)