User talk:Jafet

Hi, Jafet.vixle, Welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope you like this place — I sure do — and want to stay. Before getting too in-depth, you may want to read about the Five pillars of Wikipedia and simplified ruleset. If you need help on how to title new articles check out the naming conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the manual of style. If you need help look at Wikipedia:Help and the FAQ , plus if you can't find your answer there, check the Village Pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions)! There's still more help at the Tutorial and Policy Library. Plus, don't forget to visit the Community Portal. And if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my user talk page or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will be by to help you shortly.

Additional tips

Here's some extra tips to help you get around in the 'pedia!

If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
You can sign your name using three tildes (~). If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Five will get you the datestamp only.
You may want to add yourself to the new user log.
If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.
If you're still entirely confused, or would like to get a better grasp of your wikipedia skills, and you have an IRC client (or don't mind getting one), check out the Bootcamp. It's not what it sounds like, but it is fun and can help you with your editing skills.
If you're bored and want to find something to do, try the Random page button in the sidebar, or check out the Open Task message in the Community Portal.

Happy Wiki-ing. —Kf4bdy ^talk ^contribs

PS: This is not a bot and you did nothing to prompt this message. This is just a friendly welcome by a fellow Wikipedian.

Click here to respond to this message!

Thanks

Thanks for adding Computer programming to Programming (disambiguation). I forgot the most obvious meaning when I created the page! - dcljr (talk) 22:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lehmer's GCD algorithm

Thanks for adding an article on Lehmer's GCD algorithm. Your reference for one result in that article was TAOCP "volume 4, section 5.3" — I wasn't aware that volume 4 had been published yet! (And Knuth's Web site agrees with me.) Is that result mentioned in one of the publicly available "fascicles" for Volume 4 [1], or was that a typo for "Volume 3" or something similar, or do you have access to drafts of TAOCP that aren't publicly available yet? Just curious. --Quuxplusone 21:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

l33t draftz? I wish. To be honest, I dragged it from some other source mentioning the result. Yeah, lazy me. Well, the recent earthquake around Taiwan has also intruded on a couple of fiber-optic lines so I'm out of action for a while. No online research for three weeks. Hopefully other Random Wiki Joe will help us fix the reference, if it's indeed broken. Jafet 15:34, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Matrix encryption

Your recent edit to Matrix encryption (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 13:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment on Talk:Linear_feedback_shift_register

Hi, I have replied to your comments on the Galois LFSR C code, could you please have a look at it? Ufretin (talk) 06:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of EC (programming language)

An article that you have been involved in editing, EC (programming language), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/EC (programming language). Thank you. Foggy Morning (talk) 03:16, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orwell was more thorough

I expect he was more polite too. Malla nox 12:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The perfect article

Can we work on incremental changes on the talk page? - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 18:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OOOPS!

It looks like your recent edit deleted most of the content of Wikipedia:Deleted articles with freaky titles. Just wanted to give you a heads-up in case you wish to (carefully) try again :o) --Clubjuggle ^T/C 16:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fuck my ISP... er, apologies for the incident. ~ Jafet _{Speaker of many words} 17:05, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, no worries, easily fixed. :) --Clubjuggle ^T/C 17:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

pi

Hello. Could you elaborate on your objections to the words you deleted in this edit? Michael Hardy (talk) 17:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's very vague and subjective opinion. "Perhaps" it is "elementary" — whatever "elementary" means (it may have one of several well-defined mathematical meanings depending on context, none of which seem to apply here) — or perhaps not. Exactly how many decimal places is "almost three"? Two, three, two-and-a-half? How much is two-and-a-half digits anyway? How do you measure "quick"? What exactly would qualify as a competing "other method"? An algorithm? A mental mnemonic? A formal derivation? Source it or purge it. ~ Jafet _{Speaker of many words} 17:35, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"None of which seem to apply here" makes no sense. It is quite conventional to say that a method requiring no knowledge of mathematics beyond first-year calculus is "elementary". Two-and-a-half digits would mean within 10^{−2.5 = about 0.00316. Being precise about measuring "quickness" is not easy, but this argument is so short that it's hard to imagine anyone thinking it's not "quick". Obviously a mental mnemonic would not qualify; that's absurd. "Source it or purge it" has somewhat limited applicability to things the reader can see for himself. If I call two lines of iambic tetrameter "a short poem", will there be controversy about whether it qualifies as "short", requiring one to cite authoritative literature calling it "short"? Michael Hardy (talk) 18:04, 16 August 2008 (UTC)}[reply]

The entire sentence that is being contested here, is superflous. It impresses no point that is not an editor's personal opinion or simply unsubstantiated original claims. What is the purpose of that sentence at that point in the article? It does not state a verifiable fact, nor discuss such a fact. I do not see how the inclusion of that sentence improves the quality of the article, by Wikipedia standards.

Be careful handling that straw-man; it looks pretty fragile to me. A "short poem" has, depending on context, some well-defined meaning. Compared to Requiem, a two line poem may be the limit of "short"; if the article compared to the Iliad, on the other hand, "short" may span pages. (If there is no discernible context so that "short poem" is meaningless, the same argument applies; clarify it, possibly with attribution to a source, or remove it.) This sentence however has no definite meaning that will stand out to the average mathematician or layperson, for the reasons I described, and which you seem to be absurdly and obviously trying to dismiss with a brisk, repetitive flick of one's palm.

Again, you have not defined "quick". It takes a whole article-full of exposition for a less-inclined reader to arrive at the result, while for a smart mathematician, shouldn't the correct word be "immediate"? "Elementary", again, can mean many, many, many, many meanings in this context, none (not many, but none) of which are immediately and unambiguously apparent. ~ Jafet _{Speaker of many words} 19:05, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

David L Cook article

YOu just placed a remark on the David Cook article. I am unsure as to what incomplete statement you are talking about. Can you please clarify? Thank you Canyouhearmenow 11:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I actually placed the remark on its talk page. Anyway, following the link given, which points to the current version of the article, should illustrate what I mean. To restate the problem, there is a double quote standing all by itself at the end of the second paragraph, which obviously is a mistake of some kind. ~ Jafet • business • pleasure • voicemail 11:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you speaking of the part that talks about the initials in his name? I am usure as to where this double quote is? I guess its too early for me to see it? Canyouhearmenow 11:29, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At the end of paragraph 2 in the article:

Cook's lyrics often take a look at the church and the problems that they face when it comes to handing down judgment upon common people with everyday problems."

Note the extra quote at the end. ~ Jafet • business • pleasure • voicemail 11:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing that out! I have fixed it now and it should read better. My eyes were crossed and I was not fully awake LOL Canyouhearmenow 11:44, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jafet at it.wiki

It.wiki username is now available for your global account. Ciao, Ary29 (talk) 09:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Range of plasmas

The figure for the electron density of the solar wind is not clear and seems like a useful fact. Do you have the source? Makkasu (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:45, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Design modes.svg

The file File:Design modes.svg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned file with no obvious value in transferring to Commons

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Salavat (talk) 08:10, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Paris Hilton's Dog" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Paris Hilton's Dog and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 8#Paris Hilton's Dog until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. TraderCharlotte (talk) 21:11, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Jafet/Watchlist

User:Jafet/Watchlist, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jafet/Watchlist and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Jafet/Watchlist during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 14:05, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]