User talk:Neil Parker

Discussion on Pythagorean triples
In the interests of possible further improvements on the page, may I humbly suggest that some careful thought be given to the slight contradiction posed by my contribution: namely that on the one hand the Platonic sequence is said to be a 'special case' of the general formula (m^2-n^2,2mn,m^2+n^2) with n=1 whilst on the other it can be shown that the 'general formula' itself may be derived from the Platonic sequence ([t^2-1]/2;t;[t^2+1]/2) when the parameter t is a rational number m/n.


 * That's not a contradiction – one of the triplets is just 2n2 times the other. BTW, I'm a little puzzled by this article. Is there some particular point you want to illustrate? The pictures are nice, but the article needs some sort of a wrapper around it, or something. It lacks focus as it stands. DavidCBryant 16:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded
Thanks for uploading Image:Pythagora Thm Diag1.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Pythagora Thm diag1.jpg. The copy called Image:Pythagora Thm diag1.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 09:30, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

You don't need to sign articles you write, just things on talk pages and so forth. Cheers. Zelse81 07:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Diophantus II.VIII

 * Thanks for your message. Re the adding/subtracting, the Latin runs "Communis adiiciatur utrimque defectus, & à similibus auferantur similia".  A translation close to the original could read "I add the negative terms found on both sides, and similarly subtract the common [positive] term".  The paraphrase by Bashmakova which I used spells out for the reader what the subtracted positive term (16) and the added negative terms (x2+16x) are.  This has the advantage of making the mathematics clearer for the modern reader but the disadvantage, as you point out, of moving further away from the Latin text.  If you think the disadvantage outweighs the advantage, I have no objection to using a closer translation.
 * The problem with the use of Diophantine triple is that Diophantine triple is used to mean something else, viz., a triple of rational numbers such that the product of any two is one less than a square (cf. e.g. . The reference here, in the numbering used by Heath (1885), is to Arithmetica IV.20.)  Since $$(1; \frac{2t}{t^2+1}; \frac{t^2-1}{t^2+1})$$ will generate integral triples after  clearing denominators, I believe the statement currently in the article is correct, with this clarification.
 * For the role of t, in modern language, what is going on is that a Pythagorean triple is equivalent to a rational point on the unit circle, which, over the rational numbers, is birationally equivalent to the line. So, under a suitable birational equivalence (implictly found by Diophantus), any rational point on the circle gives a rational point on the line, which is t.  Spacepotato (talk) 22:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Duplicate images uploaded
Thanks for uploading Image:Droc Page20.JPG. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:Page20.JPG. The copy called Image:Page20.JPG has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone, and you do not need to respond. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and refer to 'my contributions' to remind yourself exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot (talk) 09:59, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Ptolemy's theorem
Please go back and fix your major new section to conform to normal heading case, and include citation of your sources. Dicklyon (talk) 19:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for working on Ptolemy's theorem. It's still not clear to me how the reference relates to what you wrote. There's nothing in Hawking about sines, or not much anyway that I can find. It would be useful to have a footnote near the first intro of the interpretation from cut-the-knot, and a footnote for at least the first corrolary from Hawking, from Copernicus, etc. Let me know if you need help making footnotes; just explain to me what's from where. Dicklyon (talk) 05:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Ptolemy's Part 2
re: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptolemy%27s_theorem, my talk comment, I refer to this one: . If I have the quadrilateral dimensions ie all blue dimensions, I presume the circle  is fixed, and I'd like to see the formula for it. thanks--Billymac00 (talk) 03:45, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Query on mortgages - response

 * I've responded on my talk page...--Gregalton (talk) 03:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Re: Orphan
The best way to de-orphan an article is to add a link to it from a realted page - for example, for your article, there may be an opportunity on Compound Interest to link. This helps relate the article to other concepts already in Wikipedia. You could also try searching for similar terms (make sure if you use the article's title as a search term, you press "search" instead of "go" in the search bar). Finally, there are some suggestions here on other methods to try. Hope that helps. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:RC-circuit-step-response.png
Thank you for uploading File:RC-circuit-step-response.png. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log].

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. J Milburn (talk) 17:59, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You can choose an appropriate image copyright tag from here if you created the image, and then simply add it to the image page. J Milburn (talk) 11:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup tag
From Cleanup:
 * Continuous_Repayment_Mortgage. As an author of this article I find it extremely irritating to find an anonymous 'cleanup' tag suddenly pasted in at the top. If this is going to happen, then surely it is only etiquette for the editor/moderator to identify himself/herself or at least post a clarification on the article's talk page. Could someone please indicate whether Wikipedia policy approves the posting of anonymous cleanup tags and - if not - where I should direct a formal complaint. Thanks. Neil Parker (talk) 10:44, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The instructions on Template:Cleanup does advise editors applying the tag to explain the specific problems with the article on the talk page. This isn't a "policy", but is useful etiquette advice.  However, many editors - including myself - apply the tag without any explanation on the talk page when they believe the problems with the article are obvious.  I think the best guidance is Assume good faith; in this situation, instead of filing a complaint seeking punishment, the most productive thing to do is to ask the editor who placed the tag what problems they see in the article.  While you are awaiting their reply, it's fine to say on the talk page something like "I don't see any problems with the article, so I'm removing the cleanup tag.  Feel free to re-add it if you have specific complaints you can list on the talk page."  Cleanup tag additions are never anonymous; you can always find the editor who added it by looking under the "View history" tab from the article page. -- Beland (talk) 15:50, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

File:Mortgage data.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mortgage data.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. B (talk) 00:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Continuous-repayment mortgage
Thanks for your message; I have replied at length on Talk:Continuous-repayment mortgage. -- Beland (talk) 04:05, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

File:Forward time graph.pdf listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Forward time graph.pdf, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:39, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Interest rate calc example.pdf
Thank you for uploading File:Interest rate calc example.pdf. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:03, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Interesting approach to teaching mathematics
Perhaps you have seen this ("Better Explained")? - K (talk) 16:17, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Copernicus power of point.JPG


The file File:Copernicus power of point.JPG has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Pythagora Thm Diag1.jpg


The file File:Pythagora Thm Diag1.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "unused, low-res, no obvious use"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 00:02, 30 March 2020 (UTC)