User talk:O18

Talkback
Hi, not sure if this is proper, but thought I'd give it a shot and see what happens. I was struck by your user name and wondered if you were referring to the element oxygen. If so, I'd like to suggest that you use "18O" (with the 18 as superscript). This would be the correct chemical notation, and it would also be a play on the "do a 180" (as in 180 degrees). Anyway, I don't know if this message will actually get to anyone, much less the person intended, but I figured I'd give a shot at the "talkback" to see what transpires... Jdevola (talk) 18:46, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * O18 was correct in the early 20th century, I think. Maybe that's what he was aiming at? Double sharp (talk) 13:29, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Economics census
Hello there. Sorry to bother you, but you are (titularly at least) a member of WP:WikiProject Economics, as defined by this category. If you don't know me, I'm a Wikipedia administrator, but an unqualified economist. I enjoy writing about economics, but I'm not very good at it, which is why I would like to support in any way I can the strong body of economists here on Wikipedia. I'm only bothering you because you are probably one of them. Together, I'd like us to establish the future direction of WikiProject Economics, but first, we need to know who we've got to help.

Whatever your area of expertise or level of qualification, if you're interested in helping with the WikiProject (even if only as part of a larger commitment to this wonderful online encyclopedia of ours), would you mind adding your signature to this page? It only takes a second. Thank you. Message delivered on behalf of User:Jarry1250 by LivingBot.

Adding R-bloggers.com to the R (programming language) article
Hello O^{18}

I have revisited the thread we started on:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:R_(programming_language)#external_links_2

And I would like you to reconsider adding R-bloggers.com to the external links section in the R (programming language) article

Since our last correspondence, R-bloggers has grown to have over 5000 subscribers and over 280 bloggers. The site now hosts the RUG blog which hosts the videos from R user group meetings as well as from useR conferences. Since this is the only resource which offers the most updated view of the rapidly changing world of R, I think it should be reconsidered as a recognized resource for the R world.

I would be happy to hear your thoughts on the matter.

Best, Tal Galili (talk) 07:31, 10 November 2011 (UTC)


 * It might make more sense to make an article about R-bloggers, if it meets the notability criteria. This page would then like to the official site and could be wikilinked from the R page. Do you believe that it meets the notability guidelines? 018 (talk) 16:24, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi 018,
 * That is a very interesting direction I did not think about - thank you for your insight!
 * Making a quick google search, there are over 190K hits for "r-bloggers". The site is linked to from many of the major R sites online.  Just to compare, there are 186K hits for ggplot2 and 111K for "sweave" (both have articles).
 * Yet, I am not sure how much can be written about R-bloggers as an encyclopedic article.
 * Do you have any suggestion for a similar wiki article which might serve as a blueprint?
 * Thanks again, Tal Galili (talk) 18:21, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure the number of hits matters. For example, I looked at your linked results and they included pages with advertisements for r-blogger... probably not the best measure of "mind-share." I would look for what makes r-blogger notable (according to Wikipedia) and talk about that. 018 (talk) 18:34, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I will look into it and get back to you - thanks again. Tal Galili (talk) 18:47, 10 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello dear O18.
 * I would like to re-visit our discussion regarding the inclusion of r-bloggers.com on the R (programming language) article. The r-bloggers site is much larger now, including thousands of articles on R, with over 400 bloggers, and over 11000 readers.  It is mentioned in many websites across the web, and also in books on R (see for example ).  Do you think it might have matured to the level of significance?
 * With regards, Tal Galili (talk) 19:39, 4 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I think current editors of that article are best to decide this. Thanks for the notice! 173.13.207.65 (talk) 23:26, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

File:TnormCDF.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:TnormCDF.png, 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. Michael Hardy (talk) 05:47, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to comment at Monty Hall problem RfC
You are invited to comment on the following probability-related RfC:

Talk:Monty Hall problem

--Guy Macon (talk) 17:20, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

GA Thanks
On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your editorial contributions to Jim Thome, which has recently become a GA. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Silvershiner.jpg
FYI, there's a problem with your file, File:Silvershiner.jpg, they don't think your permission is valid. -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 09:04, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)