# User talk:Arno Matthias

## Deletion

I deleted that page you pointed out, thanks for telling me about it. Only administrators can delete things, but if you find anything else that needs deleting, have a look at Wikipedia:Deletion policy. Generally you can just edit the page and type {{delete|your reason here}} Take care. Flowerparty 22:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

## Distribution of terms

I can't see anything wrong with the language here. You seem to have a pretty sound grasp of English, to be honest. It's a bit of a technical article, though - maybe not that helpful for people who haven't studied logic, but I'm not sure that's essential. Good work :) Flowerparty 23:57, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

## Dissociation

Good description of single dissocation. I must admit I did the description of double dissociation in a hurry to prevent it being a dead link. Do you think it could be improved? It's probably in quite techy language... --PaulWicks 16:05, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

## Hick's Law

What am I missing here? The diagram clearly suggests reaction time is an affine function of the number of bits (ie. each curve is a straight line); the article states a logarithmic statement, currently in the form:

${\displaystyle ReactionTime=MovementTime+ProcessingSpeed\cdot \log _{2}(n)}$

which would produce a diagram in which the slope of the curve (for any given processing speed) would decrease with n. --Dominic Hardstaff (talk) 16:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Hang on, never mind. Bits refers to the logarithm of the number of choices (plus 1), as the article fails to state. --Dominic Hardstaff (talk) 16:34, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

## Page number needed

Regarding your addition to List of UFO religions, [1], can you please add a page number to this cite? Thank you, Cirt (talk) 13:00, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

The whole book is about the 'Seekers'. The authors became fake members of the cult to study and write about it. --Arno Matthias (talk) 16:58, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Right, right, no worries. Cirt (talk) 17:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

## Image tagging for File:THOG.png

Thanks for uploading File:THOG.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:08, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

## RAS syndrome

Hello Arno Matthias. Thank you for your work to improve RAS syndrome. You reverted my editing of your prose with the edit summary, "worse than before." I don't know if you mean the 02:07 10 August version is worse than the 7 August version, or worse than your 9 August version.

I disagree that the current version is better than either of those. For example, "A person is humorously said to suffer..." does not make it clear that the name of the supposed syndrome is humorous. It might even be taken to mean that people find actual 'suffering' funny. Additionally, per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lead section), "If possible, the page title should be the subject of the first sentence."

I am not going to edit the page for a while, so that we don't drift into an edit war, but I leave it to you and others to edit the prose in ways that you think are most appropriate. Good luck, and happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 00:12, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree, my attempt can and will be improved on stylistically (I'm not a native speaker), but your changes contained two false statements, which is what I meant with "worse than before":
"RAS syndrome...is the...use of...words" is false (see talk page), as is "A person who uses such redundancy is... said to suffer from a syndrome." And why, in this last sentence, do you use my wording ("is humorously said to)" if you find it capable of being misunderstood? --Arno Matthias (talk) 11:37, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

## File permission problem with File:Lee injacket.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lee injacket.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T/C) 14:23, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

## File permission problem with File:LeeCamp BW alley lighter.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:LeeCamp BW alley lighter.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T/C) 14:23, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

## Moving reviews

Hi there. Thanks for your help in moving reviews from infoboxes. Please note that per current consensus, if no reception section exists, reviews should not be moved to an empty "Reception" section, but put right after the infobox. Best regards.--Muhandes (talk) 22:34, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

## Barnstar

 The Original Barnstar This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Hi. When you recently edited Back Again in the DHSS, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Biro (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

## ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

## ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

 Hello, Arno Matthias. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016. 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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)