User talk:Nbarth/Archive 2013

Thanks for guide to commutative diagrams


Hi Nils. This is just to say thank you very much for writing the guide to inserting commutative diagrams into Wikipedia. I used it to insert the diagram you see to the right, used in Fourier transform and my proposed rewrite of the Fourier inversion theorem article. Not a true mathematical commutative diagram, but still useful I think. I wouldn't have bothered if your guide hadn't existed, so thank you! Quietbritishjim (talk) 01:54, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Jim,
 * Thank you for your kind words, and for taking the time both to make the diagram properly, and for tracking me down to thank me!
 * (The rewrite of the Fourier inversion theorem is also much appreciated, and the diagram certainly helps as a schematic.)
 * Glad I could be of some help – best wishes in the new year, on and off Wikipedia!
 * —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 14:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Piecewise linear manifold
Hi Nils!

I have stumbled upon your statement „This is slightly stronger than the topological notion of a triangulation.“ in that article. Where do you get that from? I would think that a manifold has a triangulation if and only if it admits a PL structure. In particular, if I’m not mistaken, a simplicial complex that is a manifold is locally finite. For such a locally finite simplicial complex, one should always be able to construct PL charts around n-simplices, don’t you think?

Kind regards —Quilbert (talk) 13:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Quilbert,
 * Thanks for the note!
 * The added condition for a PL structure (beyond a triangulation) is that the link of a simplex is a PL sphere. Thus the k-fold suspension of the Poincaré sphere (with a given triangulation on the sphere and induced triangulation on the suspension) is a (k+3)-dimensional manifold with a topological triangulation that is not a PL structure (since the link of a (k&minus;1)-dimensional simplex at the suspension “pole” is a Poincaré sphere, which is not a topological sphere, hence not a PL sphere).
 * This is explained at Triangulation (topology), but was not explained at Piecewise linear manifold, so I’ve added a note in this edit. Hope this helps!
 * —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 15:45, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh yeah, thank you so much! So I can give up my attempts to prove my last statement … —Quilbert (talk) 16:33, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * No problem – glad to help!
 * —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 17:13, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Convex analysis section
The section you wrote for the vector space article now resides at Real coordinate space. See talk: Vector space for discussion. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 06:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note Incnsi – it’s a much better fit there! (Tweaked it a bit.)
 * —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 15:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

General Purpose Macrogenerator
A tag has been placed on General Purpose Macrogenerator, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page, or a redirect loop.

If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. - Camyoung54   talk  02:14, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Mottainai for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mottainai is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Mottainai until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --Edcolins (talk) 16:16, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Quickselect
Hi — I see you split off quickselect into a separate article from selection algorithm. This is reasonable, as quickselect is a specific selection algorithm that is notable on its own and makes sense as a standalone algorithm. However, you moved with it two other selection algorithms: the median-of-medians one and introselect. These are selection algorithms, but are different algorithms than quickselect, and do not belong in the quickselect article. Could you put them somewhere else, please? Either back in the main article or in separate standalone articles would be fine. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:55, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for handling this, and for your improvements to the articles. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:06, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

No problem, and thanks for the encouragement! (Sorry for the delayed replies – busy with edits and life.) I initially just started cleaning up selection algorithm and split off all the algorithms as variants of quickselect, but you’re right, they’re much more appropriate as separate articles. I’m put a summary in the main article, as per summary style, and fleshed out the algorithm articles a bit.
 * —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 11:26, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

on Scripting language
A remark on your recent edit: while Perl wasn't designed as an extension language, some applications use it as such: notably, Oracle (visit a Perl forum and scan the questions, lots of them will be about 15-year old Perl implementations that come with some version of Oracle) and, less notably, Understand. Rp (talk) 22:53, 5 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi Rp,
 * Thanks for the note! That’s a great example, and I’ve added a discussion of Oraperl (and DBD::Oracle) in this edit.
 * —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 23:20, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Watching the watchlist
Thanks for your work on Phase line (mathematics). Alas, a vandal added a bunch of nonsense to the article over two years ago (!). I've reverted it, but I just wanted to suggest that you watch your watchlist more closely for stuff like this. Annoying, I know, but without this sort of vigilance, entropy creeps in.... --Macrakis (talk) 00:46, 19 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note Macrakis!
 * I don’t use a watchlist (I don’t monitor pages I’ve edited for future edits) – while this is valuable work, this isn’t my interest, and I put my energy elsewhere. I do clean up pages that I come back to naturally though. Thanks for your vigilance!
 * —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 12:41, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thanks for the barnstar WillNess! Glad you liked my work, and thanks for your further improvements to the article!
 * —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 09:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mots D'Heures Gousses, Rames 2009 UK.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Mots D'Heures Gousses, Rames 2009 UK.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- Тимофей ЛееСуда . 02:04, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Mots D'Heures Gousses, Rames 1980 US.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Mots D'Heures Gousses, Rames 1980 US.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- Тимофей ЛееСуда . 02:04, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Hōchōdō
Hello! Your submission of Hōchōdō at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Maile (talk) 01:48, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Goldbrick - definition
I just wanted to mention that the term goldbrick is used in the lyrics to a Disney song for the movie Aladdin. The song was written around 1990 but cut from the movie - apparently, the song is being added to the new Broadway version of Aladdin which is opening soon (2014) on Broadway. Proud of Your Boy - lyrics by Howard Ashman (1950-1991).

137.169.21.1 (talk) 17:21, 7 December 2013 (UTC)elaine


 * Hi Elaine,
 * I assume you are contacting me because I edited the Wiktionary page goldbrick in 2011 though. Thank you for the note; I’ve added a citation to the Wiktionary page, as it is much more recent than existing ones!
 * —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 00:50, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Hōchōdō
Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:32, 16 December 2013 (UTC)