- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Editing tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Manual of Style
- Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia
- Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
- Maintain a neutral point of view – this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
- Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page to follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons' policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
- No edit warring and sock puppetry.
- If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to .
- Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism, doing so will result your account or IP being blocked from editing.
The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome!
This is an automated message from 184.108.40.206. I have performed a search with the contents of Imponderables (book series), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Imponderables. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 12:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I just finished cleaning up your cut-and-paste move of Imponderables and Imponderables (book series). Next time, if you wish to move a page, please do so via the move function built into the site rather than cutting and pasting. This preserves the page history, which is required per Wikipedia's licensing terms. If you have any questions, let me know. Thanks! SchuminWeb (Talk) 20:09, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Square root, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 13:46, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Qniemiec, I removed your links (one as a reference, one as an External Link) to culture sheet.org, because it is an open wiki and is not remotely reliable as a Wikipedia reference/source, or as an external link. See WP:ELNO and WP:RS for information on what meets the standards for sourcing and external links here. I know you can't be expected to know all the many policies and guidelines here. There are usually good reasons for them, though. I sometimes find it helpful to understand the reasons behind the guidelines, since the principles can often be applied in other areas. Thanks for helping out and editing here, First Light (talk) 17:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
History of the Poles in the United States
Given your high fluency in Polish, I am reaching out to you in regards to the History of the Poles in the United States article. It has no Polish equivalent, and any time you can spend towards translating in any capacity would be much-appreciated. I would be more than happy to help any way that I can.
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
An image you uploaded
Back in December 2010, you uploaded , which appears on the page Pearson correlation coefficient. I believe that the lines are labeled wrong—the label “y=...” should be on the less steep line, and the label “x=...” should be on the steeper line. To see this, note that the slope of “y=...” is, by the standard formula, The coefficient of y in the regression of x on y is ; but when you plot it in the graph with y on the vertical axis, the slope is the reciprocal of that, namely Comparing the slopes of the two lines by cross-multiplying and using and shows that the slope of the “y=...” line is less than the slope of the “x=...” line with y plotted vertically.
- Caution: The image above is the already corrected version! --Qniemiec (talk) 23:26, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Loraof, are you sure? As you mentioned, the slope of the red line [ y=f(x) ] is , as shown by the red slope triangle with Cov(x,y) as its vertical and Var(x) as its horizontal leg. And vice versa, the slope of the blue line [ x=f(y) ] would be , with Var(y) as the horizontal leg of the corresponding blue slope triangle, and Cov(x,y) as the vertical leg, if plotted against the y-axis. However, if put into a common diagram plotted against the x-axis (as shown above), positions of the blue line's parameters change, with Var(y) now becoming the vertical leg of the blue slope triangle, and Cov(x,y) the horizontal leg, i.e. this slope is then. So, up to this point we seem to agree, don't we? The rest is a question of how Cov(x,y) relates to Var(x) and/or Var(y): as long as the first keeps being greater than both Var(x) and Var(y), the figure will keep looking as drawn, while - if Cov(x,y) becomes less than Var(x) and/or Var(y) - the situation will change accordingly, i.e the way you proposes, with the slope of the “y=...” line being less than the slope of the “x=...” line then. So, does and mean that this is always the case? Greetings --Qniemiec (talk) 14:13, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
- It’s impossible for both Cov(x,y) > Var(x) and Cov(x,y) > Var(y). First, Cov(x,y) > Var(x) means and thus which requires since But by parallel reasoning, Cov(x,y) > Var(y) requires which requires since Since these contradict each other, the case shown in the graph cannot occur. Loraof (talk) 18:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, and thanks for that fast answer. So, if I understand you correctly, this means that if Cov(x,y) is > Var(x), then on the other hand Var(y) must always be > Cov(x,y), and vice versa? Respectively ? By consequence this would mean that either , or always applied? If that's the essence of what you've tried to explain to me, I will update the figure accordingly as soon as possible. Greetings --Qniemiec (talk) 20:18, 4 January 2018 (UTC)