User talk:唐戈

Welcome!

Hello, 唐戈, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! RJFJR (talk) 16:12, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

notation

Why do you consider it better to write

\sum _{k=1}^{\it {INF}}

than the following?

\sum _{k=1}^{\infty }

You also introduced a lot of unnecessary complications in TeX code that make editing harder, like \left( q \left( m \right) \right), where you could have written q(m), or {\frac{ab}{cd}} where \frac{ab}{cd} would suffice. Michael Hardy (talk) 02:57, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The LateX code was generated by Maple software automatically,it is probably isthe standard tex code anyway, some of the tex codes are rather complicated and fills up half a page, so I don't want to mess with it, as the Maple code always printed out correctly. I few times I tried to "edit" it, and end up with the "unable to parse" etc etc and then I have to enlarged the teX 200%, and check it symbol by symbol and try to "debug", it is a nightmare.-唐戈 (talk) 23:32, 15 March 2015 (UTC).[reply]

The difference is subtle:

$f\left(x\right)=\sum _{k=1}^{\it {\infty }}{\frac {1}{{\sqrt {k!}}{x}^{k}\cos \left(kx\right)}}$ is NOT MAPLE executable

substituted x=0.5, MAPLE's answer is UN-evaluated:

$f\left(0.5\right)=\sum _{k=1}^{\infty }{\frac {1}{{\sqrt {k!}}{0.50000000000000000000}^{k}\cos \left(0.50000000000000000000\,k\right)}}$

On the other hand,

$f\left(x\right)=\sum _{k=1}^{INF}{\frac {1}{{\sqrt {k!}}{x}^{k}\cos \left(kx\right)}}$ is MAPLE executable.

Since the series is fast convering, hence set INF=30,or even INF=400, can easily get numerical value

$f\left(0.5\right)=34.594861767048513102$ INF=40

$f\left(0.5\right)=34.594861728083420963$ INF=400

Of course, $\infty$ is the right display format, I should reset $INF=\infty$ for display--唐戈 (talk) 00:14, 16 March 2015 (UTC).[reply]

May 2015

Hello, I'm JohnBlackburne. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fibonacci hyperbolic functions without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 12:36, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Bogoyavlenski-Konoplechenko equation. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 12:44, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 13:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removing AfD template

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove Articles for deletion notices or comments from articles and Articles for deletion pages, as you did at Fibonacci hyperbolic functions, you may be blocked from editing. This is an automated message from a bot about this edit, where you removed the deletion template from an article before the deletion discussion was complete. If this message is in error, please report it.—^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:54, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, do not remove standardized templates from within the AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fibonacci hyperbolic functions, such as this edit. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:11, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sock puppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 00:19, 10 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

唐戈 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

User:唐戈 IS MEANT TO USE ONLY IN ZH.WIKI, IT SHOULD LINKS TO USER:gisling in en.wiki Your "globalization" makes mess by automatically assign a new User:唐戈 to my en.wiki account that is YOUR FAULT not mine, (show me my application for user:唐戈 IN EN.WIKI ) User:gisling should links to user:唐戈 in zh.wiki, and vise versa Your "globalization" created an unwanted user:唐戈 MULTIPLE ACCOUNT IN EN.WIKI, ALSO CREATED UNWANTED "USER:GISLING" IN ZH.WIKI Mr Hunter has abuse his blocking privilege by blocking without any cause I strongly protest Mr Hunter's abuse !!!! Gisling (talk) 23:58, 12 November 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Decline reason:

You aren't actually requesting an unblock here. If you wish to use Gisling (talk · contribs) and do not wish to use this account, here on en.wiki, you are free to do so. No reason for this account to be unblocked. If you instead wish to use this account and not the Gisling account, that's fine, too. Let us know and we'll block the other account and unblock this one. Yamla (talk) 11:22, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

So, it's all our fault? You used the account that you are blaming the system for making. Here's an example of you using the accounts in an illegitimate manner. You created the article with one account and edit warred with the other. There are other examples of you using accounts illegitimately. You tried blanking this AfD and this one with this undeclared account. It makes your response here, "...you are bloody ignorant..." rather ironic.

What's this? "I do not permit my plots to appear on en.wikipedia" and so you delete from the English Wikipedia whereas, it is okay for other wikis? That doesn't work. Somebody decided to throw their toys out of the pram here with all those removals on May 16-17 2015 with their main account. Once you have made your contributions then they are licensed for use here, yes? You can't decide to disallow your images or contribs from being used on the English Wikipedia but that they may be used on the ones of your choice...it doesn't work that way.

I'm not the one guilty of abuse.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 06:18, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am an expert in two areas

1) Subminiature Photography 2) Chinese Mathematics

Since |I am blocked from editing English wikipedia , the Chinese Mathematics article in wikipedia still stay in 2017 ,no body add any newer content, pity Similarly, the content Minox in wikipedia also stay at 2017 no body able to add any new content pity.

I draw up a nicer picture of sensitometric H D curve for Photographic film and post it to Chinese wikipedia This picture is not available to en wikipedia. It is a loss to English readers. Block me ?? You actually block all English readers zh:HD曲線

I bet non of you has the

expertise to provide a similar mathematical expression describing exactly the HD curve I am at least five years ahead of you guys. I am the pioneer.You guys are the lagards.

Lagards blocking pioneer,it is quite ridiculous