Gentlemath

{{help me}}

I put this question elsewhere but maybe I should put it here?

question about totally rewriting an article There is a featured article which generates reams of heated discussion. In my naive newbie innocence I think that I could improve it and perhaps clear up some of the heated disputes. I'd like to take it and do a whole rewrite. I certainly do NOT want to then delete the whole article and dump in my rewrite.I'd like to put it out there and let the community incorporate what (if anything) they wish. Is there any way to do that? I COULD make up some other head ("the common misconceptions about x") and then let somebody merge (or let people discuss merging).

I know a revert is easy but I'm sure that my work would disappear all at once. I won't be suprised if most or all of it disappears gradually but then it will have been looked at. I think appending a rewrite at the end would probably also not be well received.

Gentlemath 06:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

While we always recommend new editors to Be bold, I'm glad to see that you are approaching this one with caution.  :-) Featured articles generally have been gone over quite thoroughly, but if there is one that is causing a great deal of discussion then perhaps it could do with some major revamping. There are two ways you might consider approaching this. The first is to take the changes you contemplate one at a time, broken down by section, and discuss them on the article's talk page. For instance, you could say "The article states this, but I think it would be more appropriate to phrase it thus..." and see how others respond. The other way is to go ahead and do a complete rewrite using a subpage of your user space. Once you have it the way you think it should read, you could then link to the proposed version from the article's talk page and ask others to comment on your proposed changes. Either way allows changes to be discussed and agreed upon before being implemented. Drastic changes made to a featured article would likely be reverted immediately, but changes with discussion and consensus have a much greater likelihood of remaining in the article. SWAdair | Talk 07:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Figurate number deprod

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Figurate number, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! PrimeHunter (talk) 02:21, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Well done

Thanks for spotting the copying at recurrence relation. I saw the edit but the thought that it might have been copied did not cross my mind. Well done! -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 00:13, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Gentlemath! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 691 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Midhat J. Gazalé - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Construction of the real numbers

Hi, your changes Construction of the real numbers are in the right direction. When you get a chance, can you source them? Who wrote that Weierstrass's construction is by means of decimals? Tkuvho (talk) 08:49, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I see that you have read the book by Rosenlicht on the construction in terms of decimals. Does he discuss the historical aspect of such a construction? I recall that Courant already used this approach, but I am not sure who did it first, as it does not seem to be Weierstrass. Tkuvho (talk) 13:23, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Help on reversion

Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to 0.999....

If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref> and one or more <ref name="foo"/> referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref> but left the <ref name="foo"/>, which results in a in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/> with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any .

If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT⚡ 01:50, 11 April 2010 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}} to your talk page.

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) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Gentlemath. 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)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Gentlemath. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Gentlemath. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)