User talk:Kaustuv/archive 4

Peano axioms up for A-class rating
Dear Kaustuv. The mathematics WikiProject has set up a process to grant articles that deserve it an A-class rating at WikiProject Mathematics/A-class rating. Recently, our article on the Peano axioms was nominated. Unfortunately, there are no comments from anybody who really knows logic, so I was hoping that you could have a look at the article, see whether there is anything there that would embarrass us, and leave a comment on WikiProject Mathematics/A-class rating/Peano axioms. Thanks. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 08:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


 * All right, will take a look in the afternoon. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 10:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

DYK

 * Regarding this, I don't believe either article ever made it to DYK. From quickly looking at histories, I see that ALoan's nomination was removed from Template talk:Did you know, but not added to Template:Did you know/Next update subsequently. Obviously no links exist to it from the main page or thereabouts. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 06:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, whoops, I'm sorry. The page was not added to the update page and it went missing. Apologies, I put it there now. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Mathematics CotW
Hey Kaustuv, I am writing you to let you know that the Mathematics Collaboration of the week(soon to "of the month") is getting an overhaul of sorts and I would encourage you to participate in whatever way you can, i.e. nominate an article, contribute to an article, or sign up to be part of the project. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks--Cronholm144 22:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Peano axioms
I remember you had started working on a rewrite of Peano axioms. Do you still have plans to work on that? CMummert · talk 23:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Peano axioms
Yes, I think your rewrite would be a step forward for the article. I can add the citations marked "citation needed". Please feel free to copy it over to the main article when you feel it's ready. When your contributions are as useful as a good rewrite of an article, I can't imagine anyone would fault you for only contributing occasionally. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 16:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Peano axioms
Your version of the article is the current version. I copyedited it some today, cleaned up a few issues, and added some references. And another editor, Paul August, has been editing it some today. The concerns that Arthur Rubin had were justifiable, but he agreed to stick with your version and move forward from there.&mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 20:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, my comment there was just to say that I am leaving the article in your hands. I myself am not entirely happy with the rewrite, but I unfortunately have only limited Wikipedia time these days and cannot keep up with discussions. I am sure you, Arthur, and Paul can make something good come of it, and I am glad you're championing the rewrite. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 20:41, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Discussion you may have an interest in
Hi there! You may be interested to read a post I have made at Village pump (policy), as it makes reference to the infamous "Warcraft character articles" AfD discussion. Cheers! --Stormie 00:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Sunir Shah
Dear Kaustuv, I am trying to figure out what happened with the Sunir Shah article. I created a new Sunir Shah article in the fall of 2007, and after a few months with no problems, plus a few weeks without looking at my watchlist, I find the article deleted with dates and arguments are per 2006. I want to contest this deletion, including initiation of a full debate on the subject. Can you please explain why and how you decided to reactive an old deletion procedure instead of initiating a new one? - Redeyed Treefrog (talk) 23:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Since writing the above, I have found the more recent deletion debate at Articles for deletion/Sunir Shah (2nd nomination), and I see you are not even a participant. If you are interested, you can see my post at User talk:Ezeu. - Redeyed Treefrog (talk) 23:11, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Message regarding your use of the No Multi License Template
In case you are not aware, the Wikimedia Foundation has proposed that the copyright licensing terms on the wikis operated by the WMF – including Wikipedia – be changed to include the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC-BY-SA) license in addition to the current GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) as allowed by version 1.3 of the GFDL. The community has approved this change with 75.8% in favor, and on June 15, 2009, the change will take effect. You currently have NoMultiLicense on your user or user talk page, which states that your edits are licensed under the GFDL only. On or before June 15, this template will be changed to reflect Wikipedia's new licensing terms. If you accept the licensing change, you do not need to do anything (and feel free to remove this message); if you do not accept it, we regret that you will no longer be able to contribute to the encyclopedia. Please join the discussion at Village pump (policy) if you have any comments.

Delivered by The  Helpful  Bot  at 20:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC) for the Village pump. Report errors here.

Pittsburgh event for Wikipedia's tenth anniversary
Hi! Since you have a connection to Pittsburgh, I wanted to invite you to the Wikipedia Tenth Anniversary celebrations we're having in Pittsburgh on Saturday, January 15. During the daytime, we're going to be having a photo contribution drive where anyone can bring in their digital photos or prints and Wikipedians will teach people how to upload them and add them to articles, and maybe introduction to Wikipedia workshops as well. Then in the evening, we'll have fun at the Carson City Saloon. There will be free Wikipedia t-shirts and other goodies, as well. See the Pittsburgh meetup page for more details. I hope to see you there!--ragesoss (talk) 15:53, 1 January 2011 (UTC)