User talk:Smjg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archived discussion:

Disambiguation link notification for March 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Breeder (cellular automaton), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Puffer (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) 08:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

SVG on fair use logos[edit]

Regarding your edit here, can you explain what you mean by "'low resolution' and 'inappropriately in JPEG format' are independent of one another"? Vector formats inherently have no resolution, unless they contain raster elements, in which case it would not be inappropriate to store it as a JPEG anyway. The only reason to use an SVG would be so that it can be losslessly scaled, in which case "resolution" is meaningless. I would agree with leaving the {{Bad JPEG}} template in place, but it should be replaced with a similar-resolution PNG, not an SVG. 0x0077BE [talk/contrib] 20:45, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

I replaced the image in question with a PNG, hopefully this should resolve the issue (File:Bullseye-logo.png. Given that it's currently only used on the Bullseye page, and that page only uses 160px-200px (I think it looks a bit better at 200px), I'm thinking we might want to actually reduce the resolution of the image to 200px, since anything higher should be unnecessary.0x0077BE [talk/contrib] 21:05, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Most-perfect pandiagonal magic squares[edit]

This refers back to your contribution made on 25 July 2006 showing, inter alia, that there are three essentially different most-perfect pandiagonal magic squares. No source was shown.

The following extract is from 'The On-Line Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences' (OEIS sequence reference: OEISA051235)

"Number of essentially different most-perfect pandiagonal magic squares of order 4n. "Let N = 4n = Product{g}[(p_g)^(s_g)] (p_g prime) and let W_v(n) = Sum{0 <= i <= v-1}[(-1)^{v+i}BINOM(v+1, i+1)*Product{g}BINOM(s_g+i, i)] then a(n) =2^(N-2)*(2n)!^2*Sum{0 <= v < Sum{g}s_g}[W_v(N)(W_v(N)+W_{v+1}(N))]."

I am assured that, for n=1, this formula shows that there are 48 essentially different most-perfect pandiagonal magic squares. Will you comment, please?

Sherwin35 (talk) 19:17, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, it's always nice to hear from somebody showing an interest in my contributions.
It would appear that the sequence on OEIS is based on a different definition. There are 48 if you consider them to be equivalent only by rotation and reflection. But panmagic squares have another equivalence – moving the top row to the bottom, the left row to the right, and so on. Still, it's a bad description since it doesn't say what constitutes "essentially distinct", and I for one would naturally expect a sequence described as such to recognise this equivalence. For the record, I just searched OEIS and found OEISA160540.
However, my contribution didn't say that there are three most-perfect 4×4 panmagic squares, merely that there are three 4×4 panmagic squares. Though they do happen to be all most-perfect. And OEISA160540 has in its description a slightly different additional condition.
But indeed, I'd like to discover how may distinct panmagic squares there are of each size a fair way beyond 4×4. And then maybe submit my findings to OEIS. — Smjg (talk) 23:36, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
PS Hope you don't mind me linkifying the sequence number in your message :)


I saw you have had some contributions in the article. Currently, the article is missing a major section about Cinderella's origin and history prior to written work on Cinderella. Sure, some ancient stories related to Cinderella were mentioned somewhere in the article, but they are not in the section where they should be. I believe the "origin and history" of Cinderella has enough merit to deserve a section of its own. I'm making a request to ask you to add my suggested section into the article. You can look for your own sources of your choices. Here are some sources I've found: 1, 2, 3. I'm not a native English speaker, so I don't think I can do it even if I want to. It's your choice to do it or not though. Thanks! (talk) 20:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

please don't defaultsort game characters[edit]

In most cases their surnames (if they have them at all) are just unimportant. For example, just nobody ever thinks "Kasugano"[1] when they look for "Sakura from Street Fighter", and many or most people won't even know she has a surname (in games she's just Sakura[2] and even on Wikia in the article title she's also just Sakura[3]). As such, it only confuses people who want to find something in categories. The exceptions of this are extremely rare, one of them is Wesker from Resident Evil where nobody thinks of "Albert". It all depends on how the characters are addressed in games, and consequently by media and gamers. The exceptions should be selected only case-by-case (you can see how they are called in their articles, this should tell you what name they're know as). So please revert all your defaultsorts unless they actually apply. Thanks. --AggressiveNavel (talk) 19:44, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

In fact the article should be titled "Sakura (Street Fighter)", already many characters follow this convention and she's even one of only 3 Street Fighter exceptions [4]. Like with Charlie (Street Fighter) instead of "Charlie Nash". But it only shows how completely unimportant most of these surnames are. --AggressiveNavel (talk) 19:56, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

And now to only add to the user confusion, for some reason you only did it with females anyway. So really, please revert it all. --AggressiveNavel (talk) 20:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@AggressiveNavel: The standard way to alphabetise personal names is by surname first. OK, so some people (such as Madonna) are normally known only by their first names, and so filed by that name, but their articles are generally titled as just the name by which they are known (or in some cases, that name followed by a disambiguating label). If some such articles are titled contrary to this principle, this is an issue with the article title. Generally it is presumed that, if an article about a person has a forename+surname title, that is the name by which the person is known, and therefore the name should be alphabetised in the standard way. If it isn't, then the article title needs to be amended first things first. If I'm wrong, please point me to the relevant WP policy.
And that "some reason" is that I happened to look at Category:Female characters in video games and find that a lot of them were filed by first name, and so 'corrected' them. I just hadn't got as far as looking at other categories. — Smjg (talk) 21:16, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

They're not "some people" or persons, they're characters. You've made such a mess even Alexandra sisters now have different sorting, because one (Cassandra Alexandra) has her unimportant surname in the article and the other one (Sophitia) not. Not to mention all the male characters. It's just chaos now, so fix it back. --AggressiveNavel (talk) 21:33, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Where does the meaning of "people" begin and end? In my mind they can be either real or fictional - most nouns denote the nature of an entity within the entity's scope of existence, whereas "character" is unusual in that it says something about the scope of existence. Anyway, on the basis of what you say, determining which form is the common name needs to be done on a case-by-case basis, not just changing them all en masse, which is bound to incorrect some of them. And you're wrong about all the male characters being filed your way. Even if it were so, it would be very unlikely to remain so for long because of other people making this same change independently of me or each other. In the absence of a clear policy, they're bound to be in a mess. — Smjg (talk) 22:18, 7 April 2015 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Smjg. You have new messages at WP:BOTREQ.
Message added 22:15, 22 August 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

cyberpowerChat:Limited Access 22:15, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:DESQview 2.8 screenshot.png[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:DESQview 2.8 screenshot.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (t c) 04:49, 23 October 2015 (UTC)


Can you create a template please for Port Vila Football League with all the editions of the competition, I do not know how to do it. Also with VFF National Super League. Thanks!--Alexiulian25 (talk) 22:48, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Alexiulian25, it isn't clear what exactly you're asking me to do or why you're asking me. Could you please be more specific? Maybe give an example of another page that has something like what you're after? — Smjg (talk) 23:28, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I am asking you because I edit now pages on Port Vila Football League, it was a disaster and you reverted the page 2010–11 Port Vila Premier League, the problem was the line, in some pages was shorter and in other pages longer. Thats why I redirected, my mistake, I am not an expert in editing, I just know football.

Example of template : [5] Every football competition on Wikipedia have templates with seasons, to can choose faster the edition you want to read. Every football competition apart from this one I edit now, and a few others from Oceania football. Do you understand what is missing now ?--Alexiulian25 (talk) 23:34, 10 November 2015 (UTC)


Just reminding you to mark your CSD pages as patrolled! :P JTtheOG (talk) 00:50, 13 November 2015 (UTC)