Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.
On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was
true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to
false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.
Monty Hall problem
Hello, I wanted to let you know that I undid your recent edit in Monty Hall problem because it didn't appear constructive. The decision tree shows all possible locations of the prize. Please use the article talk page for suggestions to improvement of the article. Thank you. Gerhardvalentin (talk) 22:43, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
I have replied to your post at your talk page, User: Gerhardvalentin, your reversion was not constructive. Please read the changes to the article before reverting.
Description to Monty_tree_door1.svg
Hi, I just want to let you know that I reverted your reversion. First of all, I did not delete anything. I merely changed the description.
The new description was "Tree showing the probability of every possible outcome if door 1 contains the prize".
The old description was "Tree showing the probability of every possible outcome if the player initially picks Door 1"
For this tree diagram to work, the player does not necessarily have to pick the Door 1 as his first choice. The player makes a choice at each layer of the tree diagram. So the tree diagram still applies if the player picks door 2 as his first choice.
- Fangfufu, I started this discussion on your user talk page where it belongs, informing you that your edit in the article was not constructive. This discussion therefore should be continued on your talk page, so I move it here. Unfortunately you misunderstood what the diagram means. Meanwhile your second edit in the article has also been reverted, this time from a professor in mathematics who explained you that diagram also on the article's talk page. Please try to always continue a discussion there where it began, and also to sign your discussion posts. Gerhardvalentin (talk) 19:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC)