| Revision as of 17:00, 8 November 2005 editOmegatron (talk | contribs)Administrators35,798 edits →[] to the []← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:13, 8 November 2005 edit undoOmegatron (talk | contribs)Administrators35,798 edits Image licensingNext edit → | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
| You cut a huge chuck off ] and marked that as a minor edit, without giving an ]. That is not good. Please go to ] and explain your change. Thank you, ] (]) 16:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC) | You cut a huge chuck off ] and marked that as a minor edit, without giving an ]. That is not good. Please go to ] and explain your change. Thank you, ] (]) 16:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC) | ||
| : Actually, I mention above was done rather carelessly. The first thing you cut is the wording talking about the volume of a parallelogram, but you left in however the formula for that volume, so that thing does not make any sense now. Also, you put two links at the bottom which are obviously misspelled. Taking into account that you did not put an ], this edit amounts to basically vandalism. Please use more care. Thank you. ] (]) 16:51, 8 November 2005 (UTC) | : Actually, I mention above was done rather carelessly. The first thing you cut is the wording talking about the volume of a parallelogram, but you left in however the formula for that volume, so that thing does not make any sense now. Also, you put two links at the bottom which are obviously misspelled. Taking into account that you did not put an ], this edit amounts to basically vandalism. Please use more care. Thank you. ] (]) 16:51, 8 November 2005 (UTC) | ||
| == Image licensing == | |||
| You licensed ] as NoRightsReserved. | |||
| Since it's a derivative work of my ], it must be released under the same license as mine. If I understand correctly, you can use any one of the three licenses I used ({{tl|GFDL}}, {{tl|cc-by-sa-1.0}}, or {{tl|cc-by-sa-2.5}}), or just add the {{tl|SelfBSA}} multi-license template, as I did. | |||
| I honestly don't care as long as it's copyleft. — ] 17:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:13, 8 November 2005
Welcome to the Misplaced Pages
I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:
- Misplaced Pages:Tutorial
- Misplaced Pages:Help desk
- M:Foundation issues
- Misplaced Pages:Policy Library
For more information click here. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.
Sam Spade 11:20, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
op amp edits
Please see Talk:Operational_amplifier_applications#Recent_edits_by_Fresheneesz
Generally, we want to cover opamp circuits the way they are used, not as variations of a universal configuration, so I'm not sure these recent edits are that helpful. Maybe you could put something like that in the differential amplifier article, showing the connection between diff amps and all the other varieties? (I did the same thing with a "universal transistor amplifier", and it's not a great idea. See Talk:Common collector, for example.)
Although the use of HTML to represent math in articles is somewhat contentious, using complicated HTML to simulate the same effect as TeX is definitely bad, and mixing both within the same equation is very bad. Can you restore them to TeX? — Omegatron 16:57, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Total relations
I have my doubt about your recent edit to Binary relation, in which you change the definition of total relation from "for all x and y in X it holds that xRy or yRx" to "for all x and y in X it holds that either xRy or yRx (but not both)". In my experience, the first definition is more common; in fact, I don't remember ever seeing the second one. Can you provide a reference in which the second definition is used? In any case, the next sentence, which says that "is greater than or equal to" is an example of a total relation, does not make sense after your change. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 21:12, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Cross product
You cut a huge chuck off Cross product and marked that as a minor edit, without giving an edit summary. That is not good. Please go to talk:Cross product and explain your change. Thank you, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:39, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
- Actually, the edit I mention above was done rather carelessly. The first thing you cut is the wording talking about the volume of a parallelogram, but you left in however the formula for that volume, so that thing does not make any sense now. Also, you put two links at the bottom which are obviously misspelled. Taking into account that you did not put an edit summary, this edit amounts to basically vandalism. Please use more care. Thank you. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:51, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Image licensing
You licensed Image:Opamp-noninverting.png as NoRightsReserved. Since it's a derivative work of my Image:Opampnoninverting.png, it must be released under the same license as mine. If I understand correctly, you can use any one of the three licenses I used ({{GFDL}}, {{cc-by-sa-1.0}}, or {{cc-by-sa-2.5}}), or just add the {{SelfBSA}} multi-license template, as I did. I honestly don't care as long as it's copyleft. — Omegatron 17:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
