User talk:KarlFrei

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to Wikipedia!!![edit]

7 September 2006


Congratulations![edit]

Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Man's Barnstar
For updating all those references in the table at National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Bravo!

Szu (talk) 16:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact[edit]

Publisher and accessdate are helpful and should be added, but I chose not to let that concern me too much in terms of a review. I have reviewed and passed this article as a GA. All of the issues from the first GAN have been addressed, and I can find only very minor issues to bring up - which I did on the talk page. Congrats, and keep up the good work! Resolute 19:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Mertens conjecture counterexample[edit]

You provided a fractional argument as an explicit counterexample to the Mertens conjecture (which the article previously said was unknown). What does such an argument mean? --Tardis (talk) 18:54, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't quite understand what you mean. What did I do? All that I had planned to do was to update the best known upper bound on M(n)/m^(1/2)... KarlFrei (talk) 18:59, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
You added an explicit value for m(233029271 5134531215 0140181996 7723401020 4456785091 6681557518 6743434036 9240230890 8933261706 9029233958 2730162362.807965). Since M is a number-theoretical function (Mertens function explicitly describes it as a function of a positive integer), what does it mean to apply it to such a non-integer? --Tardis (talk) 13:26, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

You are completely right, I misread the paper. What the authors actually use is a function h(y,T) which is guaranteed to be in the range of m(n) (to be precise, within lim inf m(n) and lim sup m(n)). Moreover, any value h(y,T) is known to be approximated arbitrarily closely and infinitely often by m(n). The argument I gave above for m is actually the argument y for h(y,T), and there is no explicit relationship to any specific n. I rewrote the article. Thanks! KarlFrei (talk) 11:33, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

NPVIC figure[edit]

I don't know about the text file, but one easier way would be to group all the squares that make up each state. They were grouped at one point, and I ungrouped them so I could rearrange everything to make the whole thing more geographically accurate. Tweaking the shape of a discrete cartogram is actually a very addicting game... » Swpbτ ¢ 04:54, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Hand-coding[edit]

Hey all :).

I'm dropping you a note because you've been involved in dealing with feedback from the Article Feedback Tool. To get a better handle on the overall quality of comments now that the tool has become a more established part of the reader experience, we're undertaking a round of hand coding - basically, taking a sample of feedback and marking each piece as inappropriate, helpful, so on - and would like anyone interested in improving the tool to participate :).

You can code as many or as few pieces of feedback as you want: this page should explain how to use the system, and there is a demo here. Once you're comfortable with the task, just drop me an email at okeyes@wikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).

If you'd like to chat with us about the research, or want live tutoring on the software, there will be an office hours session on Monday 17 December at 23:00 UTC in #wikimedia-officeconnect. Hope to see some of you there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:35, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment[edit]

Hey KarlFrei; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:40, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Mistaken revert of Cartogram NPVIC Current Status.svg[edit]

Hi! I think your revert on Jan. 30 was made incorrectly. Indeed, Oregon needs to be made gray in the top map (it appears the bottom map was already fixed.) However, Minnesota is missing from the bottom map in the current revision. I'm going to take the revision right before yours and fix the color of Oregon and reupload the file, does that seem correct to you? Thanks! -- cmelbye (talk/contribs) 03:31, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

I suppose so! It is very strange, I have no idea what happened there. Moreover, if I look at the file on Wikimedia, MN *is* there, but on the picture in the NPVIC article, indeed MN is gone and WI is colored yellow instead! Very very strange... KarlFrei (talk) 10:28, 5 February 2014 (UTC)