User talk:Skeptical scientist

Welcome to wikipedia!
Welcome, alias. Have fun editing. Althai (talk) 23:55, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Why thank you alias. I will. skeptical scientist (talk) 23:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Secondary Primary account.
This is a secondary account of user:Althai. I created this account to distinguish between my mathematics/science/philosophy contributions and my other types of contributions. From now on I'll try to contribute mathematics articles under this account. skeptical scientist (talk) 23:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It is now the primary account, and has been for a decade. I haven't made any contributions under the old account since 2010, and have fully abandoned it. skeptical scientist (talk) 21:40, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Opposite day/liar paradox
Essentially, both are the same, so there shouldn't really be two pages on the same thing. A mention in the "Liar parodox" article would suffice - oh, and the history hasn't been lost - access it here. Will (talk) 21:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Note to self
Add relative randomness to algorithmically random sequence

Borged
>''You said that R. Fiend had been "borged", and I was wondering what you meant by that? Instead of answering my question, you instead chose to delete the comment... If you were worried about it being a personal attack, I don't see how he could take a message on your talk page as a personal attack, so maybe you can explain here...'' skeptical scientist (talk) 17:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I thought I had done both: (a) replied to you on your talk page and (b) deleted my comment. Apparently before heading off to sleep, I failed to complete (a).


 * My concern was that you might have interpreted it as a person attack and if you happened to think it showed a lack of respect, then others might as well. I have no wish to alienate R.fiend. Even though I don't agree with his view on this topic and am at a loss why he is entrenched, he is earnest and honest.


 * The reference is to the Borg (Star Trek), which I had assumed (incorrectly) most people would understand.


 * kind regards, --UnicornTapestry (talk) 01:17, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * >I understand that it's a Star Trek reference; I just don't know who is supposed to have assimilated him or what exactly you meant by it in context. skeptical scientist (talk) 04:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Not important. It was probably meant as a humorous reflection that some had fallen prey to the propaganda, i.e, become assimilated or "borged".


 * best regards, --UnicornTapestry (talk) 04:30, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

>P.S. that was me. I started this debate logged out, and tried to be consistent about it so that I wouldn't appear to be a sock puppet, but I suppose that it was inevitable that I'd forget eventually. I'll post logged in from now on. 75.21.74.124 (talk) 14:41, 30 July 200

Not a problem for me. I appreciate your taking the time and straightforwardness to let us know.

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 18:10, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help
here. We've needed help for a while. Saksjn (talk) 13:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up
>Due to my concerns about the use of the category generally, which was sparked by the inclusion of Expelled, I started a discussion on it here under categories for discussion. Since I know you feel strongly about the inclusion of Expelled in this category, I wanted to give you a heads up, and encourage you to participate in the debate. skeptical scientist (talk) 06:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notice. We've been drowning in Tropical Storm Fay and I'd have missed the discussion otherwise. Thank you again for your perceptive consideration.


 * --UnicornTapestry (talk) 19:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


 * And thanks once again, math dude!


 * --UnicornTapestry (talk) 19:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Meagre sets
Thanks for your comment at User talk:Nbarth#Are meagre sets Fσ?

I’ve replied there, and you are correct – I’ve corrected it. Thanks!

Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 19:05, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you help with Galton-Watson process
I think the notation on the definition isn't particularly described well. I do not want to attempt to edit it, in fear I will change the meaning. Can you help. See my Comment on the page. --MATThematical (talk) 16:39, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics
— Shibboleth ink  (♔ ♕) 02:08, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)