user talk:silly rabbit
Hi Silly rabbit - You were basically one of the only editors to make me feel welcome here at WP. Would you be interested in nominating for adminship? If so, I (and basically every other editor) would be happy to support. If you aren't interested, feel free to remove this message. One advantage of becoming an admin would be to stop harassment from other admins. Please let me know if you accept. --PST 09:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi again! I just wanted to point out that you shouldn't let other peoples' comments get to you! The "assholes" (whatever that's supposed to mean!) may insult you just to get you to retire. That doesn't mean that you have to retire! Heaps of people may insult me in real life but I know that it's because their idiots and that their comments don't matter. --PST 09:43, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Dear PST, although I reject the offer of adminship, I need to consider your plea for me to return. While I no longer find the project as a whole fulfilling, there are certain aspects of it that I do, specifically those related to mathematics. Regardless of my decision, I consider you a friend, and thank you for your voice of support. Also, take to heart that which I cannot: "Illegitimi non carborundum." Best regards, siℓℓy rabbit (talk) 01:54, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
- SR, it's quite possible to restrict yourself to mathematics. That's what I do, and the only way to retain what little sanity I've left. Of course, sometimes I'm tempted to venture outside and I give in to temptation, but it usually leads only to frustration and a swift return in the warm fold of mathematics.
- It's your decision and I don't want to pressure you in doing something you don't enjoy, but I'd surely like to see you around. Whatever you decide, I wish you all the best. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 11:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
- I have no idea what lead to your retirement, though the link you gave PST above suggests it wasn't planned. Whatever the reason, I respect it, though since your contributions and discussion were some of the best I've seen around here it's a little harsh to admit. Good luck with whatever else you decide to let occupy your mind, and I hope to see you return one day. Ben (talk) 12:50, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Manifold: redundant word
I notice that in the Manifold article you edited my "around every point there is a neighborhood which is locally indistinguishable from . . ." by removing the word "locally", with an edit summary saying that the word was redundant. Of course you are right, and for anyone who understands the topological concept of "neighbourhood" the word is completely pointless. However, the whole point of that bit of roundabout wording (rather than the more succinct "homeomorphic") was an attempt to convey the essence of the idea to a layman without understanding of the technical terms. I thought quite hard about the phrasing of this, and it seemed to me that "locally indistinguishable from" might come closer than simply "indistinguishable from" to conveying the notion that the region in question is not distinguishable from Euclidean space if you only look at it locally, although it may very well be distinguishable if you look globally at how it fits into the whole space. Had I thought I was writing purely for mathematicians it would not even have crossed my mind to put the word "locally" in, but for laymen it may not go without saying that using the word "neighborhood" implies this. I have thought again about this, and I still think the extra word might help some readers, and at worst does no harm, so I propose to restore it. If you still disagree, or have any other relevant comment, I shall be interested to hear from you. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:21, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
higher-dimensional Möbius transformations
Hi Rabbit -- in case you sometimes use your abundance of time in retirement to read this page, you might be interested in the comment I added at Talk:Möbius_transformation#Higher_dimensions :-) Joriki (talk) 09:02, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
The question is whether to present the article using row vectors or column vectors. Rgdboer , who substantially created the article, is very keen for row vectors. But my feeling is that column vectors tend to be more usual for introductions and more accessible, particularly for beginners.
It has recently been listed at WP:3O, but I'd appreciate your 2c as well, in view of the your previous sensitive handling of Euclidean vector, as well as many higher level algebra and geometry articles. Jheald (talk) 17:08, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of True Family
An article that you have been involved in editing, True Family, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/True Family. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Borock (talk) 13:22, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Just noticed your "retired" banner. Sorry to see you go. We didn't talk all that much, but I feel compelled to say I'm honored to have been in your presence here. Some fair portion of the geometry I know, I learned from your books, (that is, if I'm not much mistaken as to your real-life identity), which I found to be islands of clarity, directness and salience among the sea of sometimes-average math books held up by library shelves. linas (talk) 06:00, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
- From involutive system's version history, I came right here -- I'm very sorry to notice your retirement. Best, Jakob.scholbach (talk) 17:28, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
File:Hyperbola E.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Hyperbola E.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion 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. Calliopejen1 (talk) 04:57, 30 November 2011 (UTC)