| Revision as of 03:35, 16 March 2016 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,305,076 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:Arthur Rubin/Archive 2016) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:52, 11 April 2016 edit undoSpringee (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users18,474 edits →Pushing limits: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
| |} | |} | ||
| <!-- Message sent by User:Ktr101@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Meetup/LA/Invites&oldid=681245353 --> | <!-- Message sent by User:Ktr101@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Meetup/LA/Invites&oldid=681245353 --> | ||
| == Pushing limits == | |||
| Is this what you were referring to here? I think one has to assume that if an editor adds Koch related material to the article they would assume the article to be Koch related. I certainly noticed but honestly I would just be happy if HughD would gracefully bow out of the auto topics and we could both agree to leave each other alone (including not revisiting previous points of contention). ] (]) 01:52, 11 April 2016 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 01:52, 11 April 2016
Write a new message. I will reply on this page, under your post.
|
|
Status
Retired This user is no longer active on Misplaced Pages because of hostile editing environment.TUSC token 6e69fadcf6cc3d11b5bd5144165f2991
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!
84
Hi Arthur. I don't understand why you reverted my edit of 84 (number). Your comment is "no indication of the number in the remaining article". If you mean the article Computus which I refer to, it says, "A completely distinct 84 - year cycle, the Insular latercus, was used in the British Isles. These old tables were used in Northumbria until 664, and by isolated monasteries as late as 931."
By the way, did you ever get my letter to you of July 19, 2014? (Or those of August 3 & 11, 2014?) I have just finished a paper on the work of Louis de Branges on proving the Riemann Hypothesis (Commentary on work of Louis de Branges). Eric Kvaalen (talk) 08:59, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- @Eric Kvaalen: That material is completely unsourced; the other 84-year table appears to have a source, but the notability is questionable. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 10:06, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- I think it's an interesting fact about the number 84. It's a multiple of the Julian Calendar period (28 years) and is also close enough to a lunar cycle that it was used for Easter tables. Of course this has nothing to do with the mathematical properties of 84. It's similar to pointing out that 365 is the number of days in a year (approximately). Do you object to mentioning this because it's not notable, or because you're not sure it's true (since the Computus article doesn't give a reference)? Eric Kvaalen (talk) 10:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- I'm not sure it's true. The other 84-year cycle seems to have a reference; I'd say it could be included in 84 if a valid source was included there. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 10:53, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- I think it's an interesting fact about the number 84. It's a multiple of the Julian Calendar period (28 years) and is also close enough to a lunar cycle that it was used for Easter tables. Of course this has nothing to do with the mathematical properties of 84. It's similar to pointing out that 365 is the number of days in a year (approximately). Do you object to mentioning this because it's not notable, or because you're not sure it's true (since the Computus article doesn't give a reference)? Eric Kvaalen (talk) 10:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Books & Bytes - Issue 15
The Misplaced Pages Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 15, December-January 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs), Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)
- New donations - Ships, medical resources, plus Arabic and Farsi resources
- #1lib1ref campaign summary and highlights
- New branches and coordinators
The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:19, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Wikiproject United States Coast Guard Auxiliary
|
As a current or past contributor to a USCG article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject United States Coast Guard Auxiliary, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of the United States Coast Guard Auxiliary. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! |
COASTIE I am (talk) 01:30, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!
Wik-Ed Women Session #5
| Wik-Ed Women Session #5 | |
|---|---|
 Dear fellow Wikipedian, I would like to personally invite you to the March edition of the Wik-Ed Women meetup, which will take place on March 15, from 6-10 in the evening. It will occur at Los Angeles Contemporary Archive, 2245 E Washington Blvd, Los Angeles, California 90021 (downtown LA -- map). The building has a pink top with old signage for American Accessories, Inc. dba Princess Accessories (Photos ). There is on-site parking in the back, which also has an entrance. If you cannot attend in person, you are more than willing to work remotely, as we appreciate all help that you can provide. Finally, here is a link to the Facebook event, in case you want to invite friends, as we are always looking for new editors to help expand coverage of women on Misplaced Pages! I hope to see you there! Cosmicphantom (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:54, 15 March 2016 (UTC) Join our Facebook group here! To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list. | |
Pushing limits
Is this what you were referring to here? I think one has to assume that if an editor adds Koch related material to the article they would assume the article to be Koch related. I certainly noticed but honestly I would just be happy if HughD would gracefully bow out of the auto topics and we could both agree to leave each other alone (including not revisiting previous points of contention). Springee (talk) 01:52, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Category: