User talk:Mathsci

June songs

some flowers and music for you, - you were around when I created my first article, and we enjoyed new music --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:56, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Welcome back!! Aza24 (talk) 04:10, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

My talk page

User:RandomCanadian: please stop making edits like this {bogus AN3 warning). Johnuniq can follow edits like this easily enough if need be. But why should John waste his time? This is the third bogus report you've made.

When I wrote, Please comment on content not editors on Talk:Napoleon, you did the exact opposite. It is, however, part of a standard wikipedia guideline as my edit-summary indicated.

On Talk:Napoleon, you wrote ad hominem comments directed at me. Those comments were completely unrelated to the Napoleon talk page so were hidden per WP:TPG. (The same has happened frequently on Talk:Frédéric Chopin.) You unhid them twice and then you decided to post a bogus WP:AN3 notice.

On the other hand you knew because of my edit summary, that I was having "health problems"—in fact emergency services contacted me yesterday just before 6 am. Why did that not register with you?

If you sincerely think I have been edit warring, make a post at WP:AN3/EdJohnston and supply the diffs. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 17:37, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Johnuniq, there has been too much unsolicited activity on my user talk page, none of it making any sense. I have the right to remove any messages once read and have done so. I have left only what I've written myself. WP:AN3 warnings were added and then immediately self-reverted by User:RandomCanadian. Mathsci (talk) 20:32, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Alex, I have briefly read what you've written and am deleting it (to clear the air). When I mentioned Bonaparte family today, I placed two of them on my watchlist, because you told me to WP:FIXIT. You then made this edit[1], where you wrote, I have muted you, to prevent any further excess. All a bit weird, but hey-hoh ...

Because you previously sent me wiki-emails, I have your yahoo contact details. Hoping that you get into a better mood, sometime I'll probably send you a festive message through my principal gmail account (clavieruebung). I have listened to two of your live organ recordings on Commons and can't work out whether your performing style is French or English. @+ Mathsci (talk) 22:12, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

@Mathsci: You should know that revealing personal information about other editors is strictly prohibited. Do not gratuitously mention names/emails of other people. You might also contemplate whether feuding is good use of your time and energy. Johnuniq (talk) 23:48, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

On my "email this user", mathsci.wiki@gmail.com, I have received very few emails. One from a French group in Oxford University requesting a private interview about WP:ARBR&I: Maunus and Doug Weller are the experts fro SLPC, so I was a no show. Two other have been a mathematical editor and a retired musician. I know nothing at all about RC, except from his global edit history and that he edited as an IP.

Some have pushed for a sort of French Revolution, "guillotining categories". It has had a mixed response from editors and admins. Many are participating. Friction has resulted when the Great and the Good are examined. (I mentioned Germain Greer and Barry Humphries amongst writers and comedians without much effect.) There has been more heat than light.

My long scale edit plans continue, particularly related to Xmas music. When you pinged me, I was in the process of preparing audio files for BWV 248 II, the second part of the Christmas Oratorio. And I am contemplating partially completed sections on Advent/Christmas chorale preludes from the Orgelbüchlein, I still have a lot to write and hope that my energy levels are OK.

My feeling is that the discussion of Nicholas Wade and the Titanic caused multiple crossed wires. A seemingly innocuous topic, but ... Mathsci (talk) 02:06, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Third Day of Christmas

December songs

Thank you for your help with Herrscher des Himmels, erhöre das Lallen, BWV 248 III, especially the image from Bach's manuscript, - it was not shown on the Main page, but here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:52, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alexander Kok, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prades.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Study for the Madonna of the Cat

In this edit, you present a drawing as being located in New York. According to the sources I consulted, it would have been bought in New York (as indicated by the Bodmer Foundation) by the heirs of Arthur Pollen before joining their collection in London (see this BM link, in the "Curator's comments" section, search for "ii. London"). That's what I indicated in the article in French.

I may have misunderstood something, or if you have sources that contradict my postulate, I would be grateful if you could let me know.

Awaiting your response, thank you for your work on the article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Braaark (talk • contribs) 20:06, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

@Braaark: Bonsoir ! Thank you very much for that information, particularly about the private owner. I'll add it. (I had worked out that Larry Feinberg had moved from CUNY in NYC to become director of the art museum in downtown Santa Barbara, California.) Lord Clark and others have written quite a lot about the cat drawings; your comments will encourage me to add that. BTW I've spent quite a lot of time in France; I lived in Aix-en-Provence between 1999 and 2013. Mathsci (talk) 20:27, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

It saddens me that I don't have much time left to devote to Wikipedia. I will study your contributions more carefully when I find the time; they could allow me to enrich the French article (which I was considering revamping).

France can be a beautiful place to live for a lover of the fine arts, but like everywhere else, artistic culture tends to be concealed in favor of capitalist culture.

Thank you for responding to me so quickly and kindly. I will follow developments in the English article with interest.--Braaark (talk) 20:56, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Vinay V. Deodhar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bloomington.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Double group

Thank you for your contributions. I am a little concerned about the list applications. As far as I know the only one is in magnetochemistry. If you know of any others, please add them to the article or let me know on my talk page. Once the deletion tag is removed I intend to to fill out the article with details from the books by Cotton and Tsukerblat. Petergans (talk) 10:31, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

@Petergans: I am not sure about your questions. Do you still have access to online university [library] facilities though a proxy? On mathscinet, a mathematics resource, it's easy to find articles and books on the topic. Also, using online book resources (search for "bookos" on google), it's easy to download pdf/djvu books. Bethe's work on character tables of the 32 crystallographic groups dates back to 1929; he translated it into English in his selected works; it covers the whole of double groups. Cotton writes,

The beginning of all three theories can be traced to the year 1929, when Hans Bethe published his classic paper entitled "Splitting of Terms in Crystals." There are really two completely separate parts to Bethe's paper. The first is concerned purely with the qualitative consequences of the symmetry of the surroundings of a cation in a crystal lattice. In this part, Bethe showed that, in general, the states arising from a particular electronic configuration of an ion which are degenerate when the ion is free of perturbing influences must break up into two or more nonequivalent states when the ion is intro-introduced into a lattice. He showed how it is possible, using the methods of group theory, to determine just what states will result when an ion of any given electronic configuration is introduced into a crystalline environment of definite symmetry.

The books on "Group theory & applications" all cover double groups mathematically, as well as their applications using keywords from different scientific domains (including chemistry and physics). Mathsci (talk) 11:57, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Calabi lectures

Hi! I wanted to let you know that the 1994 lectures of Calabi at UPenn (the links to which you removed from Riemannian connection on a surface on 18 January 2022), from what I can tell, are still available at the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine: [2]. I currently don't yet know enough about the subject to justify re-adding them with the archive links, but since you have made substantial contributions to that article, I figured I should let you know about it here. Thank you, ReGuess (talk) 03:53, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Always precious

Precious

ten years

Thank you for sharing your profound knowledge of Bach's music! I decorated my talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:19, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with Bach's works and his No. 1 especially today! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:07, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Could you please use the added sources (at least once each), for BWV 56? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:29, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: please could you add references for the discography yourself, as it is not urgent? I had a 24 hour ambulatory blood pressure monitor administered for March 31/ April 1 (readings every 30 minutes), so had no sleep and am completely exhausted. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 14:45, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Understand, and all the best for your health which comes first. - No, what I meant wasn't the recordings but that several references are unused (Whittaker) and marked as such, and just one use of each would look better. But do that when you are up to it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:29, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the additions to the music! - I'll turn to the recordings now, first in the dedicated article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:28, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2022

You, under the purview of "reverting vandalism", did this, which didn't just revert vandalism, but also restored your preferred version. Unless of course you consider my version to be vandalism, in which case we have a bigger problem. You'll notice I fixed that as soon as I realised it. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 13:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

And you also added two unnecessary external audio links (when we have a perfectly acceptable version in the article)... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 13:37, 11 April 2022 (UTC)