User talk:Jacobolus

How to edit a page, General tutorial, Picture tutorial, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style, help pages, village pump, Images for deletion

Again, welcome! --Lst27 (talk) 23:54, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Archived discussion

• 2005
• 2006
• 2007
• 2008
• 2009
• 2010
• 2011
• 2012
• 2013
• 2014
• 2015
• 2018
• 2019
• 2020
• 2021
• 2022
• 2023

Going into retirement

I am so done with editors like this one. See you later. —¿philoserf? (talk) 19:49, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Cheers. I wish you well. –jacobolus (t) 20:49, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Question

I just blocked the charming user who left that rant on your talkpage. If this is a sock, I'm happy to block the master for you too. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:42, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

It looks like a sockpuppet of Special:Contributions/Jansafronov –jacobolus (t) 17:43, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Indeffed, in that case. Hope that calms things down a bit. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 17:45, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

ReferenceExpander edits

Here is a table of edits made using the ReferenceExpander bot this year, sorted by the change in page size. XOR'easter (talk) 16:56, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

@XOR'easter, @Koavf. Yikes: 2600+ of them (~2000 by Philoserf). Do you have any ideas of places other than admin noticeboard for recruiting some help skimming these for problems? I only have bandwidth to check a dozen or two at a time, so handling all 2.6k would take quite a while. Maybe we should add a column to the table for marking ones that are unchecked / checked okay / reverted / need further action. –jacobolus (t) 17:28, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Maybe Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:29, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome to add a column, insert Y and N icons, strike through text, etc., in whatever way seems beneficial. XOR'easter (talk) 14:25, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

@XOR'easter – okay, done. There are a few oddities in some of these, with the namespace or delta column including [[Special:Diff/ in them where I wouldn't expect. Looking at the earlier versions, it looks like those were already there (not mangled by me). Do you know what that is about? ––jacobolus (t) 18:20, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

I had to do some find-and-replace to make the diffs in the original data dump into working links, and that might have garbled a few other places. XOR'easter (talk) 18:58, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

I think I have fixed the odd extraneous Special:Diff/ appearances now (and checked off a few items in the process). XOR'easter (talk) 17:23, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

We've finally gotten through all the entries with negative deltas. XOR'easter (talk) 02:33, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

@XOR'easter wow what a job you folks are doing. Sorry I'm only adding an occasional dent here and there. –jacobolus (t) 03:35, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

This one on Los Angeles is a beauty: ... last1=NW |first1=1615 L. St |last2=Suite 800Washington |last3=Inquiries |first3=DC 20036USA202-419-4300 | Main202-857-8562 | Fax202-419-4372 | Media ... –jacobolus (t) 03:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

On personal comments

On their talkpage, I have asked sbb to back off from the personalized aspect of your discussion at WT:WPM. Since your latest comment is entirely about sbb (rather than HTML, math, ...), I put the same request to you. You two are clearly rubbing each other the wrong way, and one of you has to be the adult and be the first one to drop the personalized aspect of the dispute. --JBL (talk) 00:53, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, and thanks. It's been a crummy couple days for personal reasons unrelated to Wikipedia. –jacobolus (t) 00:54, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear that, and I hope things improve in the near future! (My behavior on WP gets worse -- indeed, plenty worse than yours has been -- when I am grouchy for external reasons, so I empathize. I wish I were better at telling myself to knock it off when that happens :).) --JBL (talk) 00:57, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey. I honestly never even went to your talk page, until something in my head nagged me after User:JayBeeEll's kind and smoothing comments on both our talk pages gave both of us reason to pause, and breathe, and I decided to snoop your talk.

re: crummy couple days for personal reasons unrelated to Wikipedia, I hear you. I thought I wrote that, until I reread it twice. Again, and unreservedly, handshake. 🤝. I don't think we're going to agree on the math stuff issue, but I'm confident we can reach an amicable détente. Kind regards, sincerely.  — sbb (talk) 01:49, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

No worries. All the best! –jacobolus (t) 01:52, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Power of two copy on golden.com

golden.com copied Wikipedia's article power of two. I suspect golden.com infringed Wikipedia's text.

If you think that's necessary, then possibly add a tag.

218.212.76.59 (talk) 03:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes they clearly did. If you want you can tell golden.com it's a copyright violation. Wikipedia doesn't need to mention it anywhere, as nobody is going to be confused about this point. –jacobolus (t) 03:35, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Edmund Stone

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Edmund Stone you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Vaticidalprophet -- Vaticidalprophet (talk) 20:01, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Kites

Apologies, I didn't see how reflection symmetry necessitated the adjacency of the equal length sides, but upon reflection I get it. Kites include rhombuses and squares, but exclude parallelograms and rectangles. Iismitch55 (talk) 16:18, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

No worries. –jacobolus (t) 16:18, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

{{Not a forum}} template

It is definitely not redundant to the talk header as it is supposed to be added to talk pages with too much WP: NOTFORUM violations. Lightoil (talk) 20:20, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

@Lightoil The top two lines of the talk header are: "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the «Title Here» article. ¶ This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject." Which is exactly the same thing the the "not a forum" template says. Littering pages with more banners that nobody reads does not solve any practical problem. In particular, it does not discourage anyone from making forum-like comments. –jacobolus (t) 20:31, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Jacobolus. Thank you for your work on Spheres in solid geometry. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, I had the following comments:

Hey y'all! I sure hope y'all are havin' a mighty fine day today. I just wanted to say a heartfelt thank you for takin' the time to contribute to Wikipedia by creatin' that there article. I'm happy to inform you that your article has adhered to Wikipedia's policies, so I've marked it as reviewed. Now y'all can rest easy and enjoy the rest of your day, along with your kinfolk! Y'all take care now, ya hear?

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 00:52, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Cool. The material is not amazing, and not well sourced, but I split it from content that has already been here for many years (it was out of scope for the page it was on before), and I didn't want to just delete it outright. I'm sure someone else can improve it dramatically with some work. –jacobolus (t) 01:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Spherical circle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hemisphere.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, because there is no proper article about hemispheres in spherical geometry, so the disambiguation page is the best we can do for now. –jacobolus (t) 10:37, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Blackboard bold in print in Loomis and Sternberg (1968).jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Blackboard bold in print in Loomis and Sternberg (1968).jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:30, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Okay thanks. The license status was indicated but not with a template. Fixed it up. –jacobolus (t) 02:20, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Lemniscate elliptic functions

Greetings, user Jacobolus! I have an important question. Would you please allow me to relocate the Hyperbolic Lemniscatic Functions section to a separate Wikipedia article? I ask this question to you because in the current form this article is indisputable very huge. Therefore I thought about a relocation. But what is your opinion to this suggestion? Please answer me in a very clear way! Yours faithfully and sincerely!! Lion Emil Jann Fiedler also known as Reformbenediktiner — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reformbenediktiner (talk • contribs) 07:29, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

You should put this kind of question on talk:Lemniscate elliptic functions rather than here. I don't own Wikipedia, and you don't need to ask my permission for anything, but it's good to build consensus among interested editors. –jacobolus (t) 18:22, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Cite conference

Hi. Would you like to help me and give some explanations how to cite a {{cite conference}}? Here's the example of a reference

• Graph Structure Theory: Proceedings of the AMS-IMS-SIAM Joint Summer Research Conference on Graph Minors, Held June 22 to July 5, 1991, with Support from the National Science Foundation and the Office of Naval Research, p. 205.

Here's the link of the reference: [1]. Honestly, I do know how to format references in books and journals, but I do not know how to format conference. Thanks. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 11:35, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

@Dedhert.Jr I always kind of wing it with conference citations. I'd do something like:

McCuaig, William (1992). "Intercyclic Digraphs". In Robertson, Neil; Seymour, Paul (eds.). Graph Structure Theory. AMS–IMS–SIAM Joint Summer Research Conference on Graph Minors, Seattle, June 22 – July 5, 1991. American Mathematical Society. p. 205.

If you need it on an article with citation style 2, you can add 'mode':

McCuaig, William (1992), "Intercyclic Digraphs", in Robertson, Neil; Seymour, Paul (eds.), Graph Structure Theory, AMS–IMS–SIAM Joint Summer Research Conference on Graph Minors, Seattle, June 22 – July 5, 1991, American Mathematical Society, p. 205

But feel free to just include whatever metadata you think is going to help readers. –jacobolus (t) 11:55, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

I'll probably ask some questions if I have no idea about CS1. Thanks, anyway. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 12:02, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Any time. I use {{cite conference}} for either CS1 or CS2, because the {{citation}} template doesn't support adding an extra 'conference' field. –jacobolus (t) 12:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

About our conversation in the peer review

Hey Jacobolus! Putting this here as I didn't want to call you out in front of the other editors contributing to the peer review. I'm not sure if you meant it, but your response to my comments came off to me as fairly defensive. We can agree to disagree about whether whatever changes I suggested should be implemented, but I just wanted to make it clear that my comments were not intended as an implication that your work on the article is sub-optimal. I genuinely want to help make the article better, which I daresay is the same reason you're editing it. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:00, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

@TechnoSquirrel69 Sorry, not trying to be prickly. (And feel free to call me out.) I just don't quite understand the issues with "intersections" and "prolific" (of course, feel free to rephrase these if you have language that seems clearer). The wayback thing is a bit off topic, sorry if it seems like I'm swiping at you. I am genuinely quite annoyed at the wayback bot (even though the internet archive is among my top favorite institutions ever), and I wish Wikipedia would tell the archive to save but back off on indiscriminately linking archive links to still living web pages. It feels to me more like it crosses the line from genuine service into pro-wayback spam. –jacobolus (t) 17:36, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

It's certainly plausible that there are still some bits with a bit too loose a tone. Take a look at the previous article state; I've been trying to cut out vague adulatory material and keep the article from veering into promotion, but also don't want to completely trample what was there previously that other editors put effort into. –jacobolus (t) 18:51, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Chirag Mehta's Name that Color

At https://chir.ag/projects/name-that-color/ there is a list of exactly 1,566 colors (yes, I counted), and according to Mehta:

"The color names in this list were found via Wikipedia, Crayola, and Color-Name Dictionaries like Resene."

Wikipedia's list at the time is at [2].

Subtracting the Wikipedia list still gives 1385 colors to add to the Wikipedia list of colors. Provided you don't object, I'll add in the remaining 1385 colors. SVG-image-maker (talk) 14:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

This is not a reliable source. –jacobolus (t) 14:15, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Why are Crayola and Resene unreliable? 71.239.86.150 (talk) 17:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

(a) You are linking some random web page, not Crayola. (b) Crayola does not as far as I know publish anything like detailed color measurements of their art supplies. –jacobolus (t) 17:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

So is Resene unreliable? They have their own RGB values list, available at [3] 71.239.86.150 (talk) 17:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)