User talk:Robinh - Knowledge

5376:. I showed you the papers and made the changes to the site according to your suggestions/directives. Since then, a lot of good work has been done w.r.t. that generalization with positive updates. It has been cited and used in fundamental Physics. It has even been cited by the very so-called "owners" of that function e.g. Rob Corless and D. Jeffries for the better. This is all well and good and positive and I thank you. However, I now face a peculiar problem namely a self-appointed vigilante who calls himself "HelpUsStopSpam", a fanatic with an issue concerning ResearchGate but whose major contributions consist in tearing down wikipedia contribution to shreds because he views anything he does not like as "spam". He often quotes Knowledge's policy of self-citation and he removes without proof that the wiki userid is indeed making a self-citation to remove said citation and contribution. The Conflict of interest policy (COI) in wikipedia clearly states: "Using material you have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant, conforms to the content policies, including WP:SELFPUB, and is not excessive. Citations should be in the third person and should not place undue emphasis on your work. When in doubt, defer to the community's opinion." However, he ignores agreements made with other editors, like the one we had, and just cuts away. This is why I am contacting you, this self-appointed vigilante looks at my list of contributions and applies his own criteria as a means of cutting away the contributions, I and others, have built over the years! This is why I am contacting you anonymously. His talk-page is filled of complaints from others in this regard but he just ignores them. I have myself bogged down in some kind of editor warfare. In my defense, he is the aggressor and I (and others) am the defender. He uses his own criteria way above and beyond Knowledge's expressed policies like citations without understanding that e.g. impact factors change from IT to Science to Mathematics. The trouble is I don't want to break e.g. the 3-revert rule, etc... A part of me wants to lodge a complaint with the Knowledge administrators but I fear this could backfire. I do not want to appear as the aggressor. A few questions, if I may? Part of the problem is that agreements on talk page can be erased over time. Ours is still there for the W function but some editing over the years has been applied to other sites (this vigilante started in early 2016). Is there something like a statute of limitations w.r.t. Knowledge entries? I.e. you should not be allowed to veto or cut or remove changes done in previous years because policies change over time? What are my options? 5383:

ResearchGate in current and past lawsuits but "HelpUsStopSpam" insists on forcing his own point of view here (and on all of Knowledge). I submit Knowledge has to remain objective and remain outside of such disputes. I know this sounds subjective but in a way he reminds me of Harry Potter's evil Dolores Umbridge except that Dolores was empowered to do as she did. I cannot see how "HelpUsStopSpam" is empowered apart from being just another wiki editor - sorry to say. He is not an administrator but he acts as if he was. He seems to act as if he was the grim reaper.

6080:(www.wikijsci.org) couples the rigour of academic peer review with the extreme reach of the encyclopedia. For existing Knowledge articles, it's a great way to get additional feedback from external experts. Peer-reviewed articles are dual-published both as standard academic PDFs, as well as having changes integrated back into Knowledge. This improves the scientific accuracy of the encyclopedia, and rewards authors with citable, indexed publications. It also provides much greater reach than is normally achieved through traditional scholarly publishing. 629:. I wasn't sure where to put it. Since the four can be described together, I was inclined to put them together, but I couldn't think of a good title for an article ("The Good Loo Guide et seq."?), and I certainly didn't want to create four articles. (As somebody who frequently uses a modem, I hate having to jump around short pages. I'd rather get a long page in a browser window, disconnect, and then read.) Although Glashan's contribution was considerable, it was less than Routh's, so I've put it in the article on Routh. 1860:

approximately 5% of edits are vandalism and 97% of that vandalism is done by anonymous editors. Obvious vandalism is the vast majority of vandalism used. From the data gathered within this study it is also found that roughly 25% of vandalism reverting is done by anonymous editors and roughly 75% is done by wikipedians with user accounts. The mean average time vandalism reverting is 758.35 minutes (12.63 hours), a figure that may be skewed by outliers. The median time vandalism reverting is 14 minutes.

2229: 4377: 4244: 5398:. It's been a couple of decades since the modicum of algebra I studied, so I enjoy pondering those questions which show up on the ref desk and appear to be within the scope of my limited subject knowledge. After pondering on your question for a while I was just about to give up and ask you what the explicit isomorphism was when the very simple and obvious answer struck me. I then wondered if you made the connection to 6203: 4073: 4918: 4764: 4317: 4449: 6111: 5987: 5872: 5784: 5673: 5486: 5301: 5228: 5152: 4819: 4667: 3963: 3637: 4154:. You stated that "The matrix so obtained will be Hermitian positive definite." Do you have any prove that the matrix in fact will be positive definite? Do you know any books or other references for this? I've been cracking my head to think if it's actually positive definite or just positive semidefinite, like any other covariance matrix from real valued vectors. 4970: 1764:

would be such diversity for what I thought was a fairly simple probability question. Now I just have to assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of the three (Bayes, Wilson's interval and the new one you supplied). Do you know if there is a good article or textbook chapter that discusses the various approaches? Thanks again for your excellent answer.

3755: 2862:

pi^4+pi^5~=e^6 that appeared in the article ("personal communication by...") temporarily. Some think that attribution of a print source is a requirement, but I think the standard should be that it's only a preference. In any case, personal communications are a form of attribution at least, though not of notability necessarily.

1834:). However, that edit was his own reversion of his own error. So you re-introduced his error. Please be more careful in the future to revert only to clean versions. By the way, "undo" only undoes the last change in the difference, even if you push the button while looking at a difference covering more than one change. 1801:

Hi Robinh, I would certainly support a merge. If you look at the edit history you'll see that I originally merged oblique shock and shock wave and left a redirect at oblique shock. Actually the stuff at "types of shock wave" is a bit of an embarrasment, but I was having a bit of a low creativity day.

1712:

I am yet a WikiNewbie (if I may coin such a word, unless someone else has already done so), and have many questions about the proprieties of this place. I am therefore writing to ask you for help (or at least, pointers to the necessary (more!) reading) so I can figure out whether it is proper for me

1419:

With regard to this page that you created I was wondering if you could help me with an interesting question I thought of. If the millisecond pulsar is rotating at that speed and is 4-5 earth radii the outside edge is rotating at way over the speed of light, 383.035581 to 478.794476 times the speed of

901:

pictures. See, I hadn't clue that they were fractal; I very accidentally found out that something distantly related was fractal-ish, and followed the leads. Its very odd, to me, that books on chaotic dynamics, fractals, etc. never actually mention these ... but I am now the happier for knowing this.

936:

1) Have you been able to confirm that the theta_2 theta_3 etc. that you use in the Weierstrass invariants are consistent with the definitions used given in other articles? There's some mumble-words in the article on theta that make me wonder if all of these really are defined consistently. I mean,

478:

shows a good construction example. If you reload the page you will get another arbitrary square. I am not using an exhaustive method, I just place "the rigth values" arbitraryly at known "relevant positions". The code is (depending on the programming language) a few line only. For every position in

1503:

Hi Nesbitt. No worries. To me, "self-efficacy is the belief (however accurate) that one has the power..." implies that the statement is true, even as the accuracy approaches perfection. This is the way that such sentences are understood in my field of mathematics. I wanted the emphasis to be on the

1100:

page, and I've added my reasons on the talk page of shock wave. it's not that I don't agree that I was too harsh in the first edit, but the quality of the original material was truly abysmal, and I think that some difficult decisions were necessary to prune out everything which wasn't 100% correct.

588:. This surprises me, as there was already a link to him. Or does the start of a new section trigger the need for (or at least desirability of) new links? (I'm new hereabouts, so I really don't know. I guess I could look it up, but I've had my fill of digging around the "Special" pages for one day.) 2861:

I see that you were around at the beginning (originated) article, are still here, and communicated intensively with the contributor of my pet coincidence (from among those on the page at present). I thought I would tell you about the current threat and ask if MrHumperdink provided the sourcing of

2701:

Thanks about your comments concerning the generalization to the Lambert W function. Will do. I am new to this kind of forum and I could use a few pointers w.r.t. adding and editing articles and/or discussion threads. When it came to pointing out that an article was incomplete, I was following

1859:

The current study analyzed a sample pool of 100 random articles. Within these 100 articles there were a total of 668 edits during the months of November 2004, 2005, and 2006. Of those 668 edits, 31 (or 4.64%) were a vandalism of some type. The study's salient findings suggest that in a given month

1763:

Thank you for providing (yet another) way to answer my question! I have asked the same question in a number of different forums, and have yet to get the same answer twice, yet have gotten three very distinct and very believable anwers (and a host of not so believeable answers). I had no idea there

1543:

I have reverted your partial restoration to the gravitational tug article. Giving such a precise value for delta-v is meaningless here: changing delta v of 0.0019 m/s is the same as 0.002 or 0.005 in this context. What matters is the order-of-magnitude of the delta. The gravitational tug is not

1528:

Hi! From where to find model articles of Knowledge? I am used to scientifical langiuage but my emphasis has typically been in understandability rather than in fine looks. Which sentences you find confused and in which ways? What about if the source is my own thought but which should be easy enough

228:

but of course they all have their own pages, so it would just be duplication. And yet nowhere do we have the fact that they are reductions of one another. Also, should I be making new pages for things like Prandtl's lifting-line theory or does it belong in aerodynamics? Anyway, let me know your

4219:

I just noticed your post recently on the Computing RefDesk. It says you have Leopard running on a PowerPC. I was unaware that was even possible - I thought Leopard was for Intel-only machines. Can you confirm this? Also, is there anything extra-special that needs to be done to get this to work? I

2060:

I've found biological dictionaries tend to refer to it as visual only too, and they tend to use the terms 'crypsis' and 'camouflage' interchangably. I guess we'll have to change the definition of crypsis given then, though it seems there would then be no equivalent term for the broader meaning. I

1219:

sections of Door Furniture and Door Knockers, the reason I did this was because niethier seemed to have anything really to do with the subject and instead seemed to revolve around quotes you found in which Door knockers were used, I don't find this encyclapedic and it sets a bad example for other

4173:

I'm sorry for the messages, but I just can't see the trivial prove to the statement. I've been trying a lot of things and can't seem to figure it out. If you could really help me I would gladly appreciate it. Also, would it apply to cross-covariance matrices (between two different complex random

1747:

Um ... I should note that my article-in-preparation on QT3 is just that: an introduction. You probably have as much information about the game from the AJP article, as you will get from me. Are you interested in it as a game (i.e., tactics and strategy?) or as a pedagogical tool (i.e. teaching

1492:

One dictionary definition of however is "to whatever degree or extent." This meaning is consistent with its usage in the article. More to the point, "however" implies correctly that accuracy may vary on a continuous scale, but "whether or not" makes it a dichotomy. If no objections, I'll revert.

2475:

I don't feel like it's particularly important to provide counterexamples to the minimax theorem. That's mostly because I think the theorem is pretty clear about its limitations. Not sure... Possibly in a nontechnical part there could be counter-examples for those who want to get the gist of the

2551:

Sadly not. I'm stuck here for the time being. My contract's up in a few weeks time, so I'm scrambling around trying to finish bits and bobs of work off. I'm hopefully going to be interviewed for a position here before the end, but we'll see. Failing that, Bob seems to be in the business of

459:

the name is David Brée not Bree. I worked also on these squares and read about the work of Dame Kathleen Ollerenshaw and David Brée later. I was contacting Harvey Heinz some weeks ago but could not find the work of Ollerenshaw and Brée. Do you know where to get this book? I stoped working at

5382:

I also think this "HelpUsStopSpam" is a bit dangerous for Knowledge. E.g. He has this openly professed "jihad" against ResearchGate, he has added fuel to the fire on the Wiki site for ResearchGate just recently. ResearchGate faces criticisms but Knowledge is not one of the players against

5371:

Hello! I hope you are well. I need your help. I face a peculiar problem which forces me to contact you rather anonymously rather than the wiki userid I have been using for years (I'll explain). If you recall, I had contacted you w.r.t. a generalization of the Lambert W function and you

2880:'s exception on routine calculations refers to the sources of the numbers used in calculations, and I am reasoning that the sources, as far as that goes, are the numbers themselves, as opposed to cases where a number has some other meaning as a datum (birthday, weight of something, etc.). 5313:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

5498:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

2533:, certainly in the field of climate mitigation. As for special powers, I am hoping to procure a working computer before my contract expires. Heh. My main problem is selling my house in Romsey. Wanna buy it? On another matter, are you going to the Tyndall Assembly tomorrow? 2456:

as it stands right now is kinda a mess, a disorganized jumble of different applications of the notion of minimax. It probably wants a major re-write. Thinking about how to do that makes my head hurt. I'm new enough to wiki-ness that I'm not sure if a separate article on the

693:

Thanks. And don't worry about the 5 minutes, happens all the time in wikipedia. I ususally save my progress every few sentences (and hence have a lot of edits), but I thoght who the heck would wanna write an article about dry quicksand. Guess now I know :P Happy editing --

2825:

I realize that it's been over a year since you made this edit, but what is your basis for calling Type III SS "a discredited technique formerly used in statistics?" Admittedly, I'm only a first year Masters student, but nothing that I've seen thus far supports that claim.

2556:, there's always Sainsburys! The Christmas rush is doubtless coming up, so they'll need extra staff. ;-) Anyway, as the foregoing implies, I'm afraid property ownership is not something I'm considering in the immediate future. Good luck selling your place off. Do your 262:

from areas other than Europe and North America. The agreed convention is that bird species names are capitalised with a redirect from the lower case form, so to give consistency with the hundreds of other species accounts, I've moved the page and created the redirect.

2194: 1667:, that illustrates how complex numbers can enter into meaningful continued fraction expressions. It's not quite done yet, and I'm still aiming to append a proof (in a separate article). Anyway, if you get a chance to look at it, feedback is always welcome. Thanks! 4197:. It was on changes in brightness to the North star (Polaris) and you said it was from Science, but I tried searching in the Science archives and I didn't find anything. You wouldn't happen to remember any information that would help me track it down? Thanks, 2397:

does not imply it has no value. The stub there definitely wants some work, though. It doesn't describe any solutions to the game. Also, it might be that it's possible to model it as being on the unit square, but it looks like the current definition is on

1917:

Hi Trebbian. Thanks for your feedback. I'm no great malacologist. In fact I'm not a biologist at all (except for the mathematics of biodiversity). I just love the little lemon-shaped shells that Trivia has. One day I will add a photo. Best wishes,

302:

Hi noticed your page and did the redirect to our existing page, with the correct spelling. By the way, the Lorentz force isn't Lorentz covariant, per se, but it does transform as the spatial components of a four-vector. Keep up the good work, though. --

5240:

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

5164:

2049:

supposed to be visual only? and (2) Is crypsis as broad as this? For example is mimicry a form of crypsis, or is crypsis a different concept? I haven't researched this much myself, but it seems hard to pin down a coherent definition of these things.

1281:

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you.

1529:

for others to follow just like that? Should I first get them published in some scientifical journal? But that is difficult for a vague subject like Gaia which Knowledge though includes. I would just like to benefit those interested in the subject.

1716:

If you would be so kind as to reply to my (as yet non-existent) talk page, it would be greatly appreciated. And if this is not the appropriate venue for having contacted you, please also let me know that. As I said, I am as yet a stranger here.

4343:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

3086: 1257:

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Knowledge are

4944:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

4790:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

1119:, and thanks for the contribution. However, you did not provide any references or sources in the article. Keeping Knowledge accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a push to encourage editors to 2061:

find dictionaries as a whole are usually inadequate at providing reliable definitions, especially for subjects that are difficult to define without lengthy explanations. I'd really like to get the pages crypsis, camouflage and the annoying

275:. In the browser address box you will see http://en2.wikipedia.org/Syrian_Serin. Change this to http://en2.wikipedia.org/Syrian_serin, (first word will be capitalised anyway) and press enter to open the new page. Type #redirect ] and save. 3214: 483:

max { (a(i,j)+a(i,j+1)+a(i,j+2)+a(i,j+3) } for every i and every j. Visualy there is no (shifted) horizontal axis where the half row sums are all the same. But the construction method its not as straight forward is in the implemented

6072:

Hi Robin. In case you'd not come across it before, I thought I'd message to ask whether there are any wikipedia articles that you'd be interested in creating/updating/overhauling and submitting for external, academic peer review.

946:

2) The Weierstrass elliptic article is getting long. I'm thinking it may be time to chop it up. Maybe invariants should get its own page? Then we could have a real subsection called "numerical methods" or something like that.

1735:

Been working on a draft in my user area, but it's not yet ready for publication. You can probably find it, if you wish to take a look, user pages are not really private in any sense. Good grief, has it been nearly a year?? —

961:

Hello Robinh, thanks much for discussing the article. Since I am interested to keep the article I have overworked it a bit and I have added an explanation to the vote list. I would be glad if you had another look. Thanks. --

3452: 504:

type 4x4 and one of the 8x8 mentioned there (?) givs two straight forwad patterns to. Both regarding the consecutive position of the odd numbers and their sign. Is it worth to show this as a construction method? Regards!

1421: 1140:

Thanks for checking on the references. I don't know if you've been keeping track of the news, but wikipedia is comming under fire for having false information. Everybody is on the lookout! In that vain, I looked up

4794:

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

4347:

2913:

Howdy. How go things over in the city of dreaming spires and ivory towers? Hopefully all well. Things here pass more or less as usual. Sooner or later someone will find out that I'm a charlatan! ;-) Anyway, I

1802:

The hope was that there would be enough examples of shock waves there that people would get a good ides just from the examples. Perhaps changing the section name to "Examples of shock waves" would be a good start?

1713:

to add anything to your article. I have an interest, and a possible conflict of interest, in that I am a friend of the inventor of Quantum Tic Tac Toe, and am the author of a version of the game for the Palm PDA.

4948:

3839: 5107:. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose 3906: 885:... to "Bicycle". This section got bandied all over the place last year as editors waged war over just what does keep a bike up. It is now quite complete, and the article may be up to "featured article" level. 6156: 6032: 5915: 5827: 5716: 5526: 5341: 5268: 5192: 2359:, and there's a literature on that (so it's not original research, which it looks like it isn't), then it seems like a reasonable article to create. In terms of games with no value, the reason (for instance) 1624:

I want to add some material to Knowledge on the subject of continued fractions, particularly the applications of continued fractions in complex analysis. I noticed that you made many of the contributions to

1708:

of the policies, guidelines, suggestions, opinions, et cetera ... I was forced to conclude that I could not do so. I am therefore delighted to find that you have created an article referring to the game.

1643:

There are scads of examples from analysis where the partial denominators are complex variables, and I'd like the definition in the "generalized" article to be sufficiently general to allow for these.

6140:. 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 6016:. 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 5899:. 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 5811:. 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 5700:. 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 5510:. 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 5325:. 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 5252:. 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 5176:. 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 1640:. So if I'm going to put a hook into existing articles at all I need to work from the "generalized" case. The problem is that all partial denominators are currently defined to be positive integers. 4787: 1879:

Hi. I think you edited Go (Board game) to introduce the number of moves computer programs considered compared with chess. Unfortunately you provided no source for this claim, could you do so?--

4941: 2793:

Sorry, I didn't know you were going to create that article, or I would not have reverted the edit. Sorry! Next time, put that you're going to create the article in the edit summary please.

3723: 3599: 3560: 3313: 2363:

has no value (I'm taking that at face value, haven't proven it to myself yet) is that payoffs are defined on open sets and are discontinuous. It's getting into different territory than

1544:

relevant in asteroid kinematics. This is a matter of terminolgy: the gravitational tug is used to deflect asteroids. Asteroid kinematics is the motion of asteroids on their own (e.g.

496:

I like visual patterns. For even number squares of order n I like to replace a'(i,j)=(2*n*n+1-2(a(i,j)) and work with odd numbers only. "Gott liebt die ungeraden Zahlen." is refered to

6125: 6001: 5885: 5797: 5686: 5629:, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace. 3739: 3615: 3576: 3329: 3550: 1504:

fact that the accuracy is immaterial. You are right about the the dichotomy, though. How about "...the belief (irrespective of its accuracy) ..."? Robinh 14:50, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

3719: 3595: 3556: 3309: 3503: 2022:

Would you have any references to this article which you have started, esp. where is the name from, maybe the original paper, please. Or at least where you got it from. Thanks!

1940:

would be better, if we can gather together enough articles to populate it. Our material on the subject is so scarce at the moment though; I doubt it could gather many entries.

1664: 2934:! I don't know about dreaming spires or ivory towers...more like dozy roofs and dreary garretts! Could we talk by email? google me by name and "Cambridge". Best wishes, 2428: 2326:, because it's more confusing than helpful in the current state. I'm not sure the best way to deal with it. Possibly get more specific in the assumptions for the theorem? 2967: 3833: 1341:. Please look there 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. 870:" (emphasis in the original). Please fill in the Edit Summary when you edit an article, so the rest of us don't have to resort to a "diff" to see what you did. Thanks! 3900: 751: 4608:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Momoxia". The reason given for Momoxia's block is: "Creating attack, nonsense or other inappropriate pages".

3268: 3241: 2084:

is having a go at cleaning up some pages in the aerodynamics sections, so not would probably be a good time to lob in, if you're so inclined. Amongst other affected:

3735: 3651: 3611: 3572: 3325: 119:

Anyway, I give in - what's SOC? I googled the two names and they're definitely mathematicians, but they're not in Southampton or perhaps I should say they weren't.

1145:

and I cannot find any confirmation of it either. A quick glance suggests that arguments are good, so my bet is that it is original research. I have nominated it

4102:, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at 3097: 1146: 1049: 1378:, you made an assertion about what the likelihood function is, that simply does not make sense unless normality is assumed. But you began by saying simply: let 988:. Would you be willing to replace this with information on the actual metamaterial you were describing? I don't have the optics expertise to write about it. -- 1895:

Hi! Thank you for adding this article and for expressing interest in expanding Knowledge's coverage of molluscs. Would you consider adding more to this page?

1852:) just finished its first study and I was hoping that you being a statistician could help us formalize our findings. You can find our draft conclusions here 2243:, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Knowledge's 4549: 4340: 3727: 3603: 3564: 3317: 3710: 2002:

to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with

784: 2287:

to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add

2918:

and thought that you'd appreciate it. Actually, I imagine that many in the community might find it both amusing and rather apposite. Best regards, --

2271:. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the 1986:. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the 6084: 5061: 4930: 4776: 4329: 122:

My maths days are long over - I graduated in 1980 - and I always tended towards pure maths. I've been in IT since, which is why I looked up your IP.

186:

duplication. I'm not personally that bothered about the title; but it does look as if the former page's content should be merged into the latter's.

97:

Please note the highlighting convention: the title word or title phrase is highlighted at its first appearance. I have entered this correction at

5632:

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

3767: 3354: 2676: 1849: 1338: 3731: 3607: 3568: 3321: 1704:

Hello, Robin! Some months back, I registered with Knowledge with the intent of writing an article about QT3. Unfortunately, after I had perused

1123:

they used when adding content. Can you list in the article any websites, books, or other sources that will allow people to verify the content in

5442:

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and

6270: 4882: 4730: 4042: 3275: 2372: 2276: 1991: 437: 47: 2371:

which were primarily addressed to finite strategy games. Um, so I'm not sure where I'm going with all this. It's possible that someone at the

5057: 4282: 1831: 200:(it's been a stub for a long time) and it's going really slowly. It's occuring to me that much of what I'm writing there really belongs in 6179: 6055: 5938: 5849: 5738: 5540: 5424: 5355: 5282: 5132: 4543: 600: 286: 242: 230: 4493: 4430:

contain an (almost identical) paragraph about statistical applications, which I think you wrote. Could you please provide a reference?

2045:). Do you have any sources for this, or is it just based on your interpretation of the concept? The two main issues are (1) Is avoiding 652:

Incidentally, I have most of Glashan's books. Time permitting (and it won't for a month or so), I can say something about all of them.

479:

the binary representation there is one if statement with asigns followed by an reasignment statement. Just look here and / or e-mail me.

1936:

Hi Robinh, I've nominated this category for deletion as virtually every animal is cryptic in some way or other. Perhaps something like

1400:

page. Your terminology is wrong, you cite a "Godemont" without reference, and the basic assertion is so far from true that it's silly.

4983: 4383: 4376: 2715: 476: 388: 5595:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Knowledge's 4390: 3301: 2958: 1562:

Hi, Answered on my own talk page - Don't hesitate if you find I should do more of that type of pictures for other articles Thanks --

718:

all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the

3706: 491: 3589: 2161: 196:

I think you might be exactly who I'm looking for to talk about the organization of the fluid dynamics pages. I'm trying to write

4861: 4361: 2355:

Hi Robinh. You're going beyond what I know, so I can't answer at all quickly. Maybe after I study a bit. If you're interested in

2244: 2174: 1967: 6274: 6249: 6223: 6175: 6091: 6051: 5934: 5845: 5734: 5536: 5351: 5278: 5128: 4886: 4734: 4046: 3683: 2280: 2248: 1995: 1971: 1353: 1317: 1292: 1165:

Hi Robin. You mentioned you have the solution to this paradox months ago ,please quench my curisoty and expand the article..:)

633:, however, is a different kettle of whatever: it's very much a solo production of Glashan's. I'd thus be inclined to fold both 5054:. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. 3784: 1684: 1647: 1626: 1271: 910: 898: 548: 347:

If you knew the numbers, I could tell you why the account was blocked, but since you don't remember, I'm at a loss. Sorry.

3854: 5974: 4567: 4015: 3921: 2375:

would have some input. I'll be happy to look at any new article you create. I might be a good semi-ignorant test audience.

5403: 3821: 1456: 3888: 3702: 3691: 6149: 6025: 5908: 5820: 5709: 5519: 5458: 5334: 5261: 5185: 4585: 4488: 2598: 52: 42: 30: 26: 5119:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to

1420:

light to be exact! I know this cannot be though. How I came up with that number was using google caclulator using this

116:

Those articles are really good, you're catching the Wiki bug! - I couldn't resist correcting a typo though - sorry ;-)

6262: 6214: 6192: 6161: 6037: 5920: 5832: 5721: 5531: 5346: 5273: 5197: 5124: 4925: 4909: 4874: 4830: 4826: 4812: 4808: 4722: 4678: 4656: 4118: 4034: 3974: 3970: 3956: 3952: 2842: 2787: 2236: 2109: 1963: 1181: 290: 212:

applied to gases" and nothing else, which doesn't work for the importance of the topic. And I keep wanting to insert

4254:

permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting

1459:. I still don't feel that approximations, like pi ~= 22/7, deserve the name of "coincidence". Hope to hear from you! 5599:

and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.

2560:

colleagues have any pertinent advice on that front? One would presume that it's their bread and butter. Cheers, --

6266: 6210: 6196: 4878: 4726: 4427: 4038: 420: 4220:

have Tiger on my G3 PPC iBook, but wouldn't mind trying Leopard (I really doubt it would work, though). Cheers. --

1853: 4934: 4780: 4333: 4122: 4088: 3647: 3279: 2954: 2252: 1975: 1825: 1003: 981: 974: 768: 715: 564: 540: 514: 450: 57: 1238:. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The 4537: 3815: 3792: 2855: 2742: 2016: 1200: 754:

Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at

727: 98: 3882: 3774:

policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure

2356: 1930: 1375: 1364: 5046:

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Knowledge appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited

2340:

I added the condition to the theorem that it's for games with finite strategies. How does that work for you?

2157: 163: 133: 4995:

again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on

4404: 4095: 2769: 2684: 1983: 989: 221: 1334: 423:. Could you add them as you create them, and also add any others you know of that are not there? Thanks. 5563:, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from 4272: 4103: 3811: 2719: 2138: 2126:

Hi, Robinh, are you the same RobinH on Wikibooks? If so, someone needs to look into a serious COI issue,

1821: 1076: 1061: 863: 68: 5642:

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at

4532: 3878: 2745:, but then decided that the math context is really different, so "see also" section was a compromize... 530: 6137: 6013: 5896: 5808: 5697: 5507: 5322: 5249: 5173: 4202: 2153: 1404: 1235: 1194: 922: 225: 213: 189: 167: 79: 37: 4087:

on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a

3508: 1959: 482:

I am aware of 8x8 squares having the property that min { a(i,j)+a(i,j+1)+a(i,j+2)+a(i,j+3) } <: -->

332:

Hi, Robin. Can you tell me the address that you were working form that got blocked? Are you on AOL?

6077: 4198: 2127: 1937: 779:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "

5654: 5643: 5588: 5032: 4954: 4898: 4507: 4357: 4133: 3861: 2830: 2711: 2529:

Hello mate. Well things are settling down here . . . although I would characterize economics as the

2308: 2170: 2038:

Hello, I noticed you were the editor who originally provided the description currently being used at

1599: 1239: 4128:

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

3928: 3467: 3081:{\displaystyle 2^{n}\cdot ({\frac {n}{2}}!)^{2}\cdot \prod _{k=1}^{M}{\binom {2\cdot e_{k}}{e_{k}}}} 1783:

Hi Robinh, I'm rather hoping that Genick doesn't make an uninteligable mess of the page like he has

1142: 963: 6278: 5970: 5626: 5614: 5604: 5560: 5552: 5120: 5047: 4890: 4738: 4456: 4179: 4159: 4099: 4084: 4050: 4026: 4003: 3914: 3847: 3802: 3667: 3650:. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at 2581: 2284: 2260: 1999: 1904: 1603: 1590: 1573: 1563: 1530: 1349: 1313: 1288: 1251: 1124: 1116: 1053: 560: 408:

OK, I figured it out. You introduced that variable but only later in the article said what it is.

153: 88: 74: 5965:

and rearranged things with the aim to make it more readable. Feel free to take a look and adjust.

2267:

notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on

2209: 1982:

notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on

1220:

users. (We wouldn't want a Toilets in litrature section for example) Thanks for understanding. :)

5765: 5450: 4423: 4398: 4296:

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing!

4227: 3782:. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 3779: 2765: 2680: 2401: 2292: 2268: 2062: 2006: 1687:

article. Please take a look and tell me what you think when you have the time. Merry Christmas!

1637: 1428: 1383: 1159: 698: 686: 526: 522: 424: 409: 399: 106: 5966: 4561: 4434: 2065:(which will have to be merged into one or the other) sorted out, so that's why I brought it up. 758:

those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

463:

about four weeks ago. I generate only some straight forward patterns. Just take a look. Regards

2930:

Hi there! great to hear from you, and I enjoyed the link very much; a peculiar conjugation of

2394: 2360: 2228: 1382:

be a random variable with expected value ___ and variance ___. That does not imply normality.

645:

and fold "Anode Enzyme" into it. (Unfortunately all I know of "Genius" is what's reproduced in

547:

Dear Robinh, I was reading lots of documentation pages about InterWiki links. I made a note at

179: 6286: 6245: 6119: 5995: 5879: 5791: 5680: 5494: 5443: 5373: 5309: 5236: 5218: 5206: 5160: 5142: 5096: 5087: 5077: 4857: 4843:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be

4709: 4705: 4291:

If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

4251: 4151: 4011: 3942: 3775: 3298: 2805: 2481: 2466: 2435: 2380: 2345: 2331: 2131: 2081: 1688: 1668: 1651: 1586: 1582: 1549: 1460: 1083: 1057: 852: 839: 762: 671: 660: 374: 255: 102: 3209:{\displaystyle n=p_{1}^{e_{1}}\cdot \ldots \cdot p_{M}^{e_{M}}=\prod _{k=1}^{M}p_{k}^{e_{k}}} 6168: 6133: 6044: 6009: 5927: 5892: 5839: 5804: 5728: 5693: 5636: 5503: 5469: 5318: 5245: 5169: 5116: 5100: 4618: 4484: 2899: 2885: 2867: 2592: 2513: 2368: 1413: 719: 638: 362: 316: 125: 6148:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 6024:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 5907:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 5819:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 5708:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 5518:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 5333:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 5260:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 5184:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 5115:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 3827: 796:

I agree to ] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

487:

I have never seen a 12x12 Most-perfect. Have you seen / generated one before? Where? / How?

311:

No problem. Happens to me too, those kinds of things. By the way, there is indeed a famous

5650: 5622: 5395: 5028: 5024: 4974: 4950: 4894: 4438: 4349: 4129: 3894: 3643: 3629: 3246: 3219: 2838: 2458: 2304: 2165: 2066: 2051: 1941: 1880: 1128: 667: 352: 337: 217: 209: 201: 183: 3686:. I am travelling and can neither be online nor on IRC. Thanks for your help in advance! 3294: 2894:

Found net reference (Ph.D. from CalTech :) ). zhurnaly.com/cgi-bin/CoincidentalTaxonomy.

1966:

process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Knowledge's

738:

license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Knowledge's license, the

4573: 4243: 3986:. This 2009 invention has not been commented on or used in independent reliable sources. 937:

your usage may be correct, but I'm not convinced that all usage in Knowledge is correct.

6145: 6021: 5958: 5904: 5816: 5705: 5600: 5515: 5431: 5417: 5330: 5257: 5181: 5112: 5104: 4641: 4297: 4175: 4155: 4110: 4058: 3659: 2777: 2750: 2530: 2272: 2193: 2097: 1987: 1899: 1889: 1835: 1814: 1791:. It would be nice if you could help to correct errors without destroying the article. 1344: 1308: 1283: 1176: 1120: 814:

I agree to ] all my contributions to any ], county, or city article as described below:

626: 581: 444: 320: 304: 280: 264: 156: 145: 85: 64: 2915: 1056:, which is where I got the idea that you might know something about his work. Thanks, 6232: 6141: 6017: 5900: 5812: 5761: 5701: 5596: 5511: 5326: 5253: 5177: 5108: 5068:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these

4844: 4692: 4255: 4223: 4174:

vectors)? Or it's positive definitive only for the case of the a vector with itself?

4114: 3992: 3771: 3759: 3714: 3625: 2931: 2919: 2561: 2517: 2300: 2240: 2101: 2085: 2023: 1955: 1866: 1784: 1749: 1737: 1723: 1477: 1397: 1304: 1263: 1247: 1221: 874: 731: 695: 683: 679: 568: 552: 533: 506: 464: 457: 312: 3962: 1424:. So I was wondering if you knew what part of the pulsar is rotating at that speed. 6282: 5574: 5568: 5564: 5202: 5073: 5069: 4771: 4755: 4674: 4660: 3938: 3869: 2877: 2800: 2477: 2462: 2431: 2376: 2341: 2327: 2089: 1788: 1439: 1259: 1080: 970: 844: 634: 622: 599:

Oh, er, sorry to digress, but can I interest you (or anybody) in my comment within

585: 379: 369: 272: 205: 197: 6110: 5986: 5871: 5783: 5672: 5485: 5300: 5227: 5151: 4072: 1052:, whether our article on Cecil Rousseau should stay? I think you mentioned him at 4691:

While all contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be

3991:

While all contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, content or articles may be

2393:

Hi Robinh (just Robin?). I think I was getting various ideas crossed in my head;

6231:

While all constructive contributions to Knowledge are appreciated, pages may be

5584: 5580: 5465: 5446: 5427: 4613: 4467: 4324: 4308: 3983: 3788:

article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the

2935: 2895: 2881: 2863: 2586: 2534: 2501: 2046: 1919: 1765: 1512: 1494: 1033: 886: 773: 711: 529:

I would be notified while loging in. Would you like to start writing an article

475:

Do you mean the "linear" generion algorythm? Have you seen it somewhere before?

171: 22: 5023:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow

4117:, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see 3636: 821:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "

162:

Hi Robinh, I just found a site that might be another good place for pages like

140:

similar articles and your services may be more better suited to a project like

5399: 4460: 4193:

Hi, I'm looking for a citation for a change you added a very long time ago...

2834: 2516:- any chance of getting hold of your recipe for tablet? ;-) Best regards, -- 2105: 2093: 1777: 1097: 985: 948: 938: 903: 747: 653: 615: 608: 348: 333: 246: 234: 4867:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

4715:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

4648: 4442: 4098:

to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only

4021:

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing

3447:{\displaystyle 2^{n}\cdot ({\frac {n}{2}}!)^{2}\cdot \beth (e_{1},...,e_{M})} 2179: 1442: 1169: 4636: 4054: 2773: 2746: 2557: 2505: 2113: 1803: 1792: 1243: 1166: 1102: 787:. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page: 521:

Dear Robinh, thanks for your answer and the example. I moved your answer at

170:. It looks pretty new and I haven't checked it out in detail yet. Have fun! 136:

is not quite appropriate for inclusion in an encyclopedia such as this one,

436:

Based on the title of his book, shouldn't the page actually be titled the "

6255:

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing

2508:

paid off yet? I hope so. Have they granted you any special powers yet?

1032:

otherwise, the admin has to guess and hunt where you spotted it. Thanks. -

641:

into the article on Glashan. Another possibility would be to add a lot to

6222:

Do we need this article tagged uncited for 15 years when we already have

3293:

Do you know the book of T.V.Padmakumar, Number Theory and Magic Squares,

2731: 2208:

For reverting so many unhelpful edits and vandalism on Knowledge, I User

1545: 1490:

self-efficacy is the belief (however accurate) that one has the power....

1267: 871: 501: 493:

is showing 27 differnt subqueares with same row, column and diagonal sum?

6152:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

6028:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

5911:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

5823:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

5712:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

5522:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

5337:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

5264:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

5188:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

3754: 461: 6129:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

6005:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

5889:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

5801:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

5690:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

4463:

lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

4150:

I noticed that you made the change in the covariance article regarding

3701:

I kindly invite you to participate at the development of a new game at

2453: 2364: 2323: 2039: 2032: 497: 5449:. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the 1403:

If you were trying to say something sensible here, please rewrite it.

5051: 4987: 33:. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them: 3290:

Do you have the book written by Kathleen Ollerenshaw and David Bree?

6290: 6183: 6098: 6059: 5942: 5853: 5769: 5742: 5658: 5608: 5544: 5473: 5406: 5359: 5286: 5210: 5136: 5081: 5036: 4958: 4902: 4802: 4748: 4409: 4365: 4300: 4233: 4206: 4183: 4163: 4137: 4062: 3946: 3743: 3672: 3657:

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message.

3619: 3580: 3333: 2943: 2925: 2903: 2889: 2871: 2846: 2815: 2781: 2754: 2723: 2688: 2604: 2567: 2542: 2523: 2485: 2470: 2439: 2384: 2349: 2335: 2312: 2142: 2116: 2069: 2054: 2026: 1944: 1922: 1911: 1883: 1869: 1838: 1806: 1795: 1768: 1752: 1740: 1726: 1691: 1671: 1654: 1606: 1593: 1576: 1566: 1552: 1533: 1515: 1497: 1463: 1407: 1386: 1358: 1322: 1297: 1224: 1152: 1134: 1105: 1086: 1065: 1038: 992: 951: 941: 4838:

Journal that existed only briefly without leaving much of a trace.

682:

by the way, you beat me by 5 minutes in creating that article. --

621:

Robinh, I've just written stuff about the excellent guidebooks by

279:

The caps convention is somewhere, I'll post again when I find it!

5103:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Knowledge

4262:

This permission does not give you any special status or authority

4109:

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious

843:. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- 6165:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 6041:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 5924:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 5836:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 5725:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 4250:

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the

3709:

page. You might be interested on some card tricks. Just look at

2509: 2130:. Astonishing that self-promotional work is a featured book!! 830: 783:" template into their user page, but there are other options at 739: 259: 241:

Thanks for your comments! We should continue the discussion at

6155:

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review

6123:

is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All

6031:

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

5999:

is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All

5914:

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review

5826:

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review

5715:

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review

5525:

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review

5340:

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review

5267:

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review

5191:

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review

2584:. Let me know if you have any questions/comments or need help. 271:

to create a redirect, start from the page you have written, eg

5883:

is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All

5795:

is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All

2504:. How goes it in Cambridge's ivory towers? Has your turn to 1572:

I've just done the same for ln, uploading in a few seconds. --

848: 4788:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Buckle bunny (2nd nomination)

3590:

wikiversity:portal talk:Mathematics#Most-perfect magic square

3278:. For n = 36 = 2^2 * 3^2 this is 1.01406E+44 and not 2.7E+44 2702:

the guidelines and posted a comment on the discussion forum.

1022:, please remember to add the URL it is taken from like this: 921:

notice someone added to the article, you'll see what I mean.

6201: 4942:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Journal of Mundane Behavior

4817: 4665: 4447: 4393:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

4375: 4265:

Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal

4242: 4071: 3961: 2275:, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the 2227: 1990:, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the 6068:

External academic review and publication of Knowledge pages

5434:

as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

4121:). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found 2162:

Talk:Vandermonde's identity#Merge from Vandemonde's formula

2512:

perhaps? Anyway, I just spotted that you've been editing

2255:). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the 1978:). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the 456:

Halló Robinh, I saw the article and want to say Halló! At

1215:

Hey what's up I just want you to know I deleted your two

5684:

is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All

5579:

Information that can't be referenced should be removed (

4579: 2247:, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also " 1636:

to modify the definition appearing at the article about

6273:

process can result in deletion without discussion, and

6136: