User talk:Red Director: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:27, 22 May 2018

Feel free to leave any message/suggestion/concern/piece of advice below.

Response section

Thanks for your comments and suggestions! I appreciate you taking the time, and especially your gentle nudge toward the accepted wikipedia etiquette vis a vis filling in forms, etc., which is not always intuitive for new(er) people such as myself. I'll take your comments under advisement! newmila (talk) 15:49, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments, Red Director. I hope to continue adding to the fund of knowledge re: 19th century botanists, where needed. The one I've been working on (Edwin James - scientist) was in much need of revision. Nearly finished now. It has been a Wikipedia learning experience which will help in any future endeavors. I've done a fair amount of essaying in HTML, but this is a whole new ballgame.

Thanks again, Lblakely (talk) 17:19, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your welcome and the tips. I am happy to come back to the offer to ask questions on occasion. For some years I have been gaining some experience with Wikipedia work, but getting help is always good. Felari (talk)Felari 17:36, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your welcome and your willingness to help us newer users, Red Director! I appreciate your tips!

Hi Red, here's the problem I'm having over and over: I only edit 1-2 times a year, and the signature process is arcane at best. The four-tilde signature process doesn't apply to the preview, so I get confused every single time (six months apart or so). I will try to auto-sign now.... 73mmmm (talk) 01:31, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

--Summerintx (talk) 21:54, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Census comma changes.

That was an interesting fix you added to the census paragraphs of various articles, to add a comma. It would be nice if all those boilerplate paragraphs could be rewritten to remove stuff like the population being "spread out," which makes no sense at all. Anyway, it is nice that you are keeping an eye on the details. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 19:33, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Photo licensing

Thank you Red Director for your offer to help me as a newcomer! I'm having difficulty properly dealing with licensing for photos to post, and have gotten some messages about problems, and notifications of photos being removed in a week if I don't fix the problems. I'm unclear what to do. Is there a way for you to see these messages and advise me how to deal with them?--Dr.bobbs (talk) 21:26, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Justifying left and right on the same line

In using other pages about radio stations as a model, I notice that the first line on published pages starts with From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (justified left) and the coordinates (Coordinates: 29° 57' 17" N 98° 05' 39" W in our case) justified right. How would I do that? Thank you! --Summerintx (talk) 22:56, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Thanks for the kind words on my talk page :)

Zarthus (talk) 19:33, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do I flag inappropriate content for more experienced reviewers?

Thanks for the welcome! I do have a question - as I'm a new editor, I'm wondering how to flag inappropriate pages. I came across one that I felt someone experienced needed to look at but I can't seem to find a 'hey look at this one' type of flag.

Thanks! EchoSound (talk) 17:23, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks for your kind words and helpful suggestions! Dirkp5826 (talk) 23:06, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for note. Looking for information to learn macros.

Thanks for your message, Red Director. Yes, I've been contributing here and there since 2004, mostly on Wiktionary. Looks like somebody downgraded me in January. I don't have time to make large contributions, but try to do a little where I can. I find the macros confusing and would like to find a tutorial on them. Cheers, RS van Keuren Rsvk (talk) 00:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orlicz-Pettis Theorem

There is a stub with this title. I produced a full entry for this stub. Everything is fine, with one exception: The crucial line that follows does not print and the reference to Pettis article does not show. What should I do? Below those three lines I copy my full entry from the Sandbox. The missing line is in the source just before the sentence starting Also Dunford... Math45-oxford (talk) 20:21, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pettis directly referred to Orlicz's theorem in Banach's book. Needing the result in order to show the coincidence of the weak and strong measures, he provided a proof. ^[1].

THIS IS THE PROPOSED ARTICLE.

Orlicz-Pettis Theorem

A theorem in functional analysis concerning convergence of series (Orlicz) or, equivalently, countable additivity of measures (Pettis) with values in abstract spaces.

Let $X$ be a Hausdorff locally convex topological vector space with dual $X^{*}$ . A series $\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }~x_{n}$ is subseries convergent (in $X$ ), if all its subseries $\sum _{k=1}^{\infty }~x_{n_{k}}$ are convergent.

Orlicz-Pettis Theorem. (i) If a series  $\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }~x_{n}$   is weakly subseries convergent in  $X$   (i.e., is subseries convergent in   $X$   with respect to its weak topology  $\sigma (X,X^{*})$ ), then it is (subseries) convergent; or equivalently,(ii) Let  $\mathbf {A}$   be a si-algebra of sets and let  $\mu :\mathbf {A} \to X$  be an additive set function. If  $\mu$  is weakly countably additive, then it is countably additive (in the original topology of the space  $X$ ).

The history of the origins of the theorem is somewhat complicated. In numerous papers and books there are misquotations or/and misconceptions concerning the result. Assuming that $X$ is weakly sequentially complete Banach space, W. Orlicz ^[2] proved the following

Theorem. If a series $\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }~x_{n}$ is weakly unconditionally Cauchy, i.e., $\sum _{n=1}^{\infty }|x^{*}(x_{n})|<\infty$ for each linear functional $x^{*}\in X^{*}$ , then the series is (norm) convergent in $X$ .

After the paper was published, Orlicz realized that in the proof of the theorem the weak sequential completeness of $X$ was only used to guarantee the existence of the weak limits of the considered series. Consequently, assuming the existence of those limits, which amounts to the assumption of the weak subseries convergence of the series, the same proof shows that the series in norm convergent. In other words, the version (i) of the Orlicz-Pettis theorem holds. The theorem in this form, openly credited to Orlicz, appeared in Banach's monograph Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).. Also Dunford gave a proof. ^[3] (with a remark that it is similar to the original proof of Orlicz}. A more thorough discussion of the origins of the Orlicz-Pettis theorem and, in particular, of the paper ^[4] can be found in ^[5]. See also footnote 5 on p. 839 of ^[6] and the comments at the end of Section 2.4 of the 2nd edition of the quoted book by Albiac and Kalton. Though in Polish, there is also an adequate comment on page 284 of the quoted monograph of Alexiewicz, Orlicz’s first PhD ^[7] , still in the occupied Lwów.

In Grothendieck^[8] Grothendieck proved a theorem, whose special case is the Orlicz-Pettis theorem in locally convex spaces. Later, a more direct proofs of the form (i) of the theorem in the locally convex case were provided by McArthur and Robertson. ^[9] , ^[10]

References

^ B.J. Pettis, On integration in vector spaces,Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 44 (1938), 277–304.
^ W. Orlicz, Beiträge zur Theorie der Orthogonalentwicklungen II, Studia Math. 1 (1929), 241–255.
^ N. Dunford, Uniformity in linear spaces, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 44 (1938), 305–356.
^ W. Orlicz, Beiträge zur Theorie der Orthogonalentwicklungen II, Studia Math. 1 (1929), 241–255.
^ W. Filter and I. Labuda, Essays on the Orlicz-Petts theorem, I (The two theorems), Real Anal. Exchange 16(2), 1990-91, 393--403.
^ W. Orlicz, Collected works, Vol.1, PWN-Polish Scientific Publishers, Warszawa 1988.
^ https://www.genealogy.math.ndsu.nodak.edu/id.php?id=51907&fChrono=1
^ A.Grothendieck, Sur les applications linéaires faiblement compacts d'espaces du type C(K), Canadian J. Math 3 (1953), 129--173.
^ C.W. McArthur On a theorem of Orlicz and Pettis, Pacific J. Math 22 (1967), 297--302.
^ A.P. Robertson, On unconditional convergence in topological vector spaces, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh A, 68 (1969), 145--157.

Alexiewicz, Andrzej (1969). Analiza Funkcjonalna. Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Warszawa..
Albiac, Fernando; Kalton, Nigel (2016). Topics in Banach space theory, 2nd ed. Springer. ISBN 9783319315553..

Greetings from Yseult-Ivain

Hello, Red Director,

And that you for your kind message of welcome yesterday. I have two questions. Does there not exist a set of Wikipedia writer's guidelines for naming articles about persons who bear royal or noble titles? This has long been a subject of fascination for me, and although I have no real expertise on these matters, I have read quite a bit about them. I know that the official rules governing the ways in which these titles are bestowed, inherited, and used varies widely from country to country.

It would seem that quite a number of other Wikipedia contributors are interested in weighing in on what the title of the new Duchess of Sussex (Meghan Markle) ought to read, and it's good to see a growing interest in a topic I've always enjoyed reading about. However, although it's good to see the interest, it's a bit distressing to see people disputing about the topic, when the thoughts expressed and the language used would seem to indicate that many of the disputers are beginners in the subject. (I suppose I'm a "beginner," as well, but an "intermediate beginner," as they used to call us in swimming classes.)

Would there be a place for an "intermediate beginner" to contribute to a set of writer's guidelines about persons who bear noble or royal titles? Thanks so much, Red Director.

Yours very truly,

Yseult-Ivain --Yseult-Ivain (talk) 14:27, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[1] B.J. Pettis, On integration in vector spaces,Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 44 (1938), 277–304.

[2] W. Orlicz, Beiträge zur Theorie der Orthogonalentwicklungen II, Studia Math. 1 (1929), 241–255.

[3] N. Dunford, Uniformity in linear spaces, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 44 (1938), 305–356.

[4] W. Orlicz, Beiträge zur Theorie der Orthogonalentwicklungen II, Studia Math. 1 (1929), 241–255.

[5] W. Filter and I. Labuda, Essays on the Orlicz-Petts theorem, I (The two theorems), Real Anal. Exchange 16(2), 1990-91, 393--403.

[6] W. Orlicz, Collected works, Vol.1, PWN-Polish Scientific Publishers, Warszawa 1988.

[7] ttps://www.genealogy.math.ndsu.nodak.edu/id.php?id=51907&fChrono=1

[8] A.Grothendieck, Sur les applications linéaires faiblement compacts d'espaces du type C(K), Canadian J. Math 3 (1953), 129--173.

[9] C.W. McArthur On a theorem of Orlicz and Pettis, Pacific J. Math 22 (1967), 297--302.

[10] A.P. Robertson, On unconditional convergence in topological vector spaces, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh A, 68 (1969), 145--157.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]