User talk:Pizza Puzzle/Archive 3

Hello, Mr. Pizza Puzzle. I hope your WikiCapitalism schemes are going well. ;) Are you still doing your "uncopyrighting" thing? If so, there are quite a few articles building up on Votes for deletion, such as Bauska, Ventspils, Valka, Dobele, Cesu county, Sykes-Picot Agreement, Megaladapidae, The Firesign Theatre, Internet Anywhere Chat, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Leo Baekeland... Shall I go on? Haha, I bet you're regretting that offer now, aren't you? :) Oh, and sorry, I haven't quite got round to listening to your symphony yet, but I will do; I'm looking forward to it... :) -- Oliver P. 16:08 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)

It's rather judgmental, isn't it? : Is that a good thing or a bad thing? :) Be glad your name isn't John Howard . -- Tim Starling 13:44 18 Jun 2003 (UTC)

What you did with the wikimoney page, was wxtremely uncool. Meditate, and sin no more. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo stick 04:07 18 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Why the move of Product rule? -- Tarquin 13:38 18 Jun 2003 (UTC)


 * likewise Quotient rule. Please explain what you intend to put at the old pages -- Tarquin 16:14 18 Jun 2003 (UTC)

You are just jealous of my financial success. Pizza Puzzle
 * What financial success? So far you haven't had any takers. Anyway as soon as you do get some customers I will rob your bank. Don't expect any help from the wikipolice because they don't exist. Theresa Knott as Bonnie Cimon will you be my clyde?
 * Sorry Theresa, I was being POV up there. I have deposited all my own goodies at Juuitchan's bank, and like a nice little lemming/serf am doing the advocacy shtick. Banks are fine, competition not! 8-) Cimon Avaro on a pogo stick 14:15 18 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Re: limit (mathematics): I combined the "division-by-zero" paragraph with the discussion of l'Hopital's rule since those seem to belong together, I mentioned improper limits of infinity, I combined two examples into one, keeping the (x^3-1)/(x-1) because it shows a nice algebra technique, I removed the paragraph about the absolute value definition since it duplicates a paragraph further down in the formal section. I don't remember if there was anything else. Cheers, AxelBoldt 21:09 18 Jun 2003 (UTC)

&equal;

There's a complete list of entities in the HTML 4.01 specification. is, unfortunately, not one of them. There are these though:  (&cong;),   (&asymp;),   (&ne;),   (&equiv;) and others. It could get quite ugly inserting these in place of all math symbols though... Out of curiosity, what happens when you wrap the math stuff in &lt;math&gt; tags?

What browser is doing this weird wrapping, by the way? I wanna see if I can verify what you're seeing. -- Wapcaplet 15:14 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)


 * Hmm. I just checked in MSIE 4.0 (I'll look in 5.0 later, but I don't have 6.0 anywhere), and it does break after the dash (even if it's immediately next to a number), but not after plus or equals. I don't know if other browsers do this (Mozilla doesn't) - it seems like pretty dumb behavior. Does the  workaround work for you? I just tried that, but apparently I'm missing some fonts, since MSIE just draws a box instead of the minus. (practically anything in the extended Latin gets boxified in my MSIE). Dunno what to tell ya... It seems like there ought to be a "negative sign" symbol which would be appropriate for negative numbers, but I know of no such animal. -- Wapcaplet 00:45 20 Jun 2003 (UTC)

naming conventions for theorems: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (theorems) -

On the subject of harassments, if you do not start using the preview function, I will feel compelled to argue for the enforcement of your existing ban. I can literally watch as you are writing the Ouija article. I have mentioned the problems with your approach before and will not go through them again -- I added "preview on top" because you asked for it, so please start using the damn preview function. --Eloquence 01:55 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)


 * Please use preview until the article is finished, and then correct any spelling errors / add missing stuff to the final version. When working on long articles, I suggest doing so in a separate text editor first. What was your problem with the preview function again? If it is not the "preview on top", what is it? --Eloquence 02:03 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)

This is the edit history ouf Ouija:


 * (cur) (last) . . M 03:54 22 Jun 2003 . . Pizza Puzzle
 * (cur) (last) . . 03:53 22 Jun 2003 . . Pizza Puzzle
 * (cur) (last) . . 03:53 22 Jun 2003 . . Pizza Puzzle
 * (cur) (last) . . 03:52 22 Jun 2003 . . Pizza Puzzle
 * (cur) (last) . . M 03:51 22 Jun 2003 . . Pizza Puzzle
 * (cur) (last) . . 03:51 22 Jun 2003 . . Pizza Puzzle
 * (cur) (last) . . M 03:49 22 Jun 2003 . . Pizza Puzzle
 * (cur) (last) . . 03:48 22 Jun 2003 . . Pizza Puzzle
 * (cur) (last) . . 03:46 22 Jun 2003 . . Pizza Puzzle

Doesn't that look a little excessive to you? Yes, I know about Enhanced RC, but that doesn't solve the problems: 1) Each edit stores a full copy of the text in the database, 2) The history gets cluttered and it becomes harder to generate diffs, 3) by far most people do not use enhanced RC, and it does not work in all browsers.

If you need more time to think, just keep the edit window open and browse Wikipedia in a separate browser tab in the meantime. --Eloquence 02:11 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)


 * There is no functionality to "condense" edits. It has been proposed, and met with resistance for various reasons that I won't go into here. Please explain to me what exactly it is that stops you from thinking first, and saving later, as virtually everyone else does. --Eloquence 02:16 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)


 * Actually, if Looxix did much more of that stuff, I would suggest that he should register a bot -- we have support for hiding all bot edits from RC, precisely because many people are annoyed by cluttered RC list, which makes reviewing edits harder. And no, you won't get registered as a bot :-). I gave you the reasons why it's annoying, you provided no reasons to stop doing it, so please stop it now, or you know what will happen. --Eloquence 02:23 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I am going to stop responding to you indefinitely after this edit. You have repeatedly harrassed me. You harrassed me for voting. Now you harrass me for writing an article. You just insinuated that I dont think prior to editing. I find your attitude to be offensive and inappropriate. I do think before I edit, I think, I edit, then I think while I wait for the edit to go through; and thus, because I continue to think, I inevitably have something I wish to add; thus, I edit again.

It would appear that you are arguing that I should edit in notepad or some such program, and then cut and paste my edits to the wikipedia. However, if I did that I would be unable to use preview (which I do use) and I would be required to switch between multiple windows (which I do not want to do).

I am sorry that you are in someway disturbed by my 10 or so edits to ouija. It would appear that you would rather have no ouija article, than one with 10 edits to it. I find such an attitude to be counter-productive.

I agree with you that it is unnecessary to maintain so many copies of so many articles which are so similar. My editing is a very small percentage of the traffic here; however, you are right that something should be done to reduce the memory load. You are quite right in urging users to refrain from making excessive edits; but you are wrong in condemning my edits as excessive.

While there is certainly room for improvement in all situations, one must learn to accept that true perfection will never be reached. One must continually strive to make changes such that perfection is approached, and this is what I try to do with my editing. Pizza Puzzle


 * Well, you have failed to convince me, Lir. We'll see if the rest of the Wikipedia community thinks that you are welcome. I think I've been more than fair. --Eloquence 02:29 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)


 * "There is no functionality to "condense" edits. It has been proposed, and met with resistance for various reasons that I won't go into here."

Could you provide a link to the discussion, Eloquence? I'd personally support some form of auto-condensation, because I quite frequently edit an article and then see something else to fix, and thus end up making multiple edits (example: forgetting to sign a comment).


 * See this post, which contains my original suggestion and the reply by Mav. The solution he proposes is too complicated for my liking, and I do not like manual compression because it would clutter the user interface with non intuitive stuff. Besides, people like Lir would probably not use it anyway because of laziness unless it is active by default. And if it's active by default, you will get complaints re: information loss again. --Eloquence 02:55 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)

To Pizza Puzzle - perhaps you could try to remember to add a edit summary? I think that would help a fair bit, at least for me. Thanks. Martin 02:43 22 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Just read your page, and certainly, there are boorish advocates of both scientism and mathematical fetishism here. Look into the sad history of some of the articles that challenge those ideologies, including philosophy of mathematics, folk mathematics, persuasion technology, mathematical proof, Theory of Everything, political economy. Anything that challenges the prevailing math dogmas seems to be heavily attacked when it becomes obviously challenging to assumptions made by professors in their classes. In some cases it is laughable, as, the "two different" things that are called say folk mathematics or foundation ontology are actually more or less two different professions' versions of the same thing. The talk files are often extremely interesting. But, do not give up, that would be simply too hasty. EofT