User talk:Zvika/Archive5

Country profiles?
Hi, I saw your notice on the community portal, what exactly is it that you want people to do? The notice is not very clear. --Zvika (talk) 18:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
 * We are developing the pages at User:The Transhumanist/Country list. As each outline becomes completed enough to be useful to readers, that outline is moved to article space.  These country profiles will all become part of Wikipedia's outline of knowledge. The Transhumanist  23:41, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Unwatched

 * 1) 1. deild 1976 ‎
 * 2) 1. deild 1977 ‎
 * 3) 1. deild 1978 ‎
 * 4) 1. deild 1979 ‎
 * 5) 1. deild 1980 ‎
 * 6) 1. deild 1981 ‎
 * 7) 1. deild 1982 ‎
 * 8) 1. deild 1983 ‎
 * 9) 1. deild 1984 ‎
 * 10) 1. deild 1985 ‎

John Reaves 19:18, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Signpost - Search engine improvements
That'd be great. If I recall correctly, the only reason I didn't want to run your last piece was that it was a debate-style piece; rest assured that any straight-forward reporting on things like this are fine, and you shouldn't even have to worry about asking me. Thanks for your help. Ral315 (talk) 21:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I have some questions for you...
Are you registered to use WP:AWB, and have you installed it yet?

Are you familiar with WP:LINKY, and have you installed it (and Mozilla Firefox) yet?

I very much look forward to your reply (on my talk page).

The Transhumanist 23:27, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Panoramic_Restaurant_Liverpool
Thank you for cleaning this article up. 82.42.177.113 (talk) 22:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

minimum phsed systems
Hi zvika can you clarify in which extent what i wrote contradicts a books that you have? may be i m wrong i dont know. As far as i know minimum phased systems means (roughly speaking) that the inverse system is stable. And as you know a system is also stable when it has a pole at 0 (2 poles at zero means instable). Now in the case of linear systems where the transfer functions are expressed in terms of polinomials this means you can write the numerator as s*(s-a)*(s-b)*..... . You can easly construct a system which is not proper and fullfill this req. It is clear that non proper systems do not make any physical sens. Concerning the zerp dynamic: it is the dynamic remaning in the system and which is not observable at the output. For a fully observable system you will see the hole dynamic. For an only partially observable system some dynamic may be hidden. As you know the concept and poles is not defined for nonlinear systems. But there is an extension which extend many of the concepts of linear systems to nonlinear ones. In the case of zeros it is the zerodynamic. The connection is that if you linearize your zero dynamic and find its poles this will be the same as the zeros of the linearized system. best regards مبتدئ (talk) 19:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Discussion continued on user talk:مبتدئ. --Zvika (talk) 07:36, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi
 * since i dont want to question the scientific authority of the author you have mentioned i will assume the point with properness is correct if it is stated like that in the book, but may be you can check in other books. I was starting from the understanding that the inverse of such a system should be stable (which is fullfilled if you have a zero at 0 which means a pole at 0 for the inverse system as long as the multiplicity of the pole is 1. If you have a zero at 0 which means you have the Form s*(s-b)*.../polynom and this zero does not cancel out/ is not simplified this means you have non proper system.). But if properness is required in many formulations in different books than its more likely that i m wrong. Anyway minimumphasness is not (directly) or only related to the zeros of a system. The relation is rather defined pver an integral relation (see arabic wikipedia concerning this). Concerning the source for the definition in the nonlinear case: I have unfurtonately no sources (only my lecture notes). It may be noticed somewhere in some books about control or systen theory but i havent searched for them nor have i a title in mind now. Anyway if you think what i wrote is false feel free to delete it.
 * Best Regards مبتدئ (talk) 03:32, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. I don't speak Arabic so I can't really look this up in the Arabic Wikipedia. If you do come up with a source for your statement, please do add it in. --Zvika (talk) 13:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I guess that you will also be able to understand the relation in the arabic article. math Formula looks the same in all languages :-). Just follow the interwiki :-) مبتدئ (talk) 05:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I took a look, but I wasn't really able to figure out much from the formulas. In any case, to the best of my understanding, a minimum phase system cannot contain a zero at 0 (see minimum phase). Concerning the extension to nonlinear systems: as far as I can see, the condition you wrote does not take into account the causality requirement which is a requirement for LTI minimum phase systems, so that the nonlinear definition does not currently reduce to the linear definition. So I think it would be best to remove this sentence until we can find a reliable source for it. --Zvika (talk) 06:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * As you like. It doesnt hurt me to delete the information :-) although i can guarentee that it is true since i have it black on white in my lecture notes. The formulas you saw were giving a bound for the phase of a system at a given frequency. Systems which dont obey to this Formula are called non minimum phsed because the phase is then more negative than allowed by this bounds. Best Regards مبتدئ (talk) 17:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

by the way, look in the discussion page of the article, there is a person which also claims properness is not needed an who seems to give a source. مبتدئ (talk) 17:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * On the contrary, it appears that User:MartinOtter claimed that causality is not required, but was unable to provide a source, whereas User:LachlanA provided an additional source reiterating the definition in the article. This does create the impression that perhaps there are different definitions of minimum phase, but it's not clear to me whether this is a real difference in nomenclature between control theory and signal processing, or whether it is just a common but incorrect usage. Until we have a reliable source saying otherwise, I think we will have to stick with the definition that we can reference. --Zvika (talk) 18:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I have moved this discussion to Talk:Minimum phase as it may interest other members of the community. Please continue the discussion there if you have any further comments. Cheers, --Zvika (talk) 18:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * FYI, I have added a large commentary to your discussion on the other talk page. Please review. &mdash;TedPavlic | (talk) 13:53, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: WP:DUSTY comments
This is fixed now, sorry for the delay. In the future you can add search strings to User:DustyBot/Article groups to collapse sets of articles. Wronkiew (talk) 17:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks. --Zvika (talk) 19:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

AIV report declined
Thank you for your recent report at AIV regarding. Unfortunately I am declining your block request. While you described the IP as engaging in "vandalism after final warning," the IP's talk page shows that the IP has only received a single level-one warning this month. In the future, please be more careful that your AIV reports are accurate. Thanks again for your work to help keep Wikipedia clear of vandalism. Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 20:39, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I was not aware that the final warning must have been given in the last month. Thanks for letting me know. (Though I must say, given the history of warnings for that user, I think a block is only a matter of time.) --Zvika (talk) 09:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You are probably right about it just being a matter of time ... but until/unless that happens, we must still AGF. --Kralizec! (talk) 18:50, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer review notice
Hi, you're listed on the peer review volunteers page under technology and mentioned computer science as one of your interested topics. I just requested a review of Python (programming language) and, per the peer review page's instructions, thought I'd let you as a possibly interested reviewer know about the request. --Cybercobra (talk) 09:17, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I will try to find time although I am kind of busy in RL right now. --Zvika (talk) 19:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No obligation or rush. --Cybercobra (talk) 21:31, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and a request
Thanks for signing up at Peer review/volunteers and for your work doing reviews. It is now just over a year since the last peer review was archived with no repsonse after 14 (or more) days, something we all can be proud of. There is a new Peer review user box to track the backlog (peer reviews at least 4 days old with no substantial response), which can be found here. To include it on your user or talk page, please add. Thanks again, and keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:18, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Country outlines project update - 2009/03/08
Remember "Around the World"?

Well, we've been around the World, and around again (virtually speaking, on Wikipedia), on this project.

Things have been slowing down again, so it's time for a big push...

We've gone live
This project needed a shot in the arm. Also, its draft pages have been littering Wikipedia's categories for months. The time seemed right to move all the country outline drafts to article space.

WHAT???

Well, the drafts had been sitting in Wikipedia space for a year.

WHAT???

Development has been moving at a snail's pace and we could use the help of the Wikipedia community at large (who are more likely to find these if they are in article space).

WHAT???

Yes, we've gone live. :)

This puts pressure on us to get the blatantly incomplete elements of these outlines done. The only glaring problem is the government branches sections. These need to be corrected ASAP.

I've mentioned THE GOVERNMENT BRANCHES SECTIONS many times to many people over the past year, but the problem just doesn't seem to have been taken seriously. So let me put it another way:

HELP!!! I need your help on this now. Almost all the countries have a government with an executive branch, a legislative branch, and a judicial branch. The links for these branches need to be completed for each country outline:


 * Here's a convenient list you can use WP:LINKY on to access and edit these quickly. Please copy the list's link to the top of your talk page so that you can access it easily.

If you spot any standardization in links, and ways we can automate parts of this process, or for groups of countries that have links in common, please let me know!

Administrative support for outlines
There has been growing pressure on me to write up the administrative pages for outlines - their instructions, guidelines, etc. Therefore, I'm now in the process of composing these. Fortunately, it is mostly a matter of gathering material from messages I've written to you guys over the past year. Still, this is taking up most of my time, and I will be buried in these for the foreseeable future.

Traffic control
The next big task after the government branches sections are cleaned up is link support for the outlines.

There's quite a list of links and notices that need to be put in place around Wikipedia, providing access to them to readers, and alerting editors to the need to develop and maintain these pages. This will keep our bot people very busy (and happy).

But the most important thing right now is to get the government branches sections completed. So please, put your bots aside, roll up your shirt sleeves, and start typing.

Thank you.

The Transhumanist 03:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Copyediting
Hey, I saw your name on PRV, and noticed that you are interested in electrical engineering. I was wondering if you would be up for copyediting Stella Power Station, as it is currently a FAC and a comment which has came up is that it needs a thorough copyediting. I look forward to heading back, Fintan264 (talk) 14:41, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the pointer. That's not quite the type of electrical engineering that I have experience with, but I will take a look... --Zvika (talk) 06:49, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Logarithmically-spaced Dirac comb
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Logarithmically-spaced Dirac comb, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No indication that this is in any way a notable topic.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Oli Filth(talk 10:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)


 * You're probably right about the non-notability of this. --Zvika (talk) 17:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Why did you treat the website www.filmtaka.com as a spam
he website www.filmtaka.com you treat as a spam, some peoples (who did not know wikipedia TOS) try to add the pages of filmtaka.com in wikipedia. and there is misunderstanding occured between editors who edit filmtaka.com and administrator of wikipedia, but it did not mean that the website is spam. please stop doing rollback again and again, if you have any query, let me know.. I also forward the same message to user: WHSL. please ask me if you have problem about this website.--122.161.176.211 (talk) 10:20, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I have no idea what you're talking about. I reverted your removal of appropriate content from another user's talk page. --Zvika (talk) 10:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)