31:
708:
with our articles.) Also, the criticisms of the lead of exterior algebra are difficult to take personally, since part of me agrees with many of them. The current draft is something of an experiment in a different writing style for me. It seems to have been more successful than I would have thought, although less so than I could have hoped. Thanks again for the comments. I have edited based on these, and responded to them. Best,
629:. I'm a little worried that the new lead runs afowl of the lead guidelines (that the lead is supposed to summarize the article), but I suppose that is sometimes relaxed to various degrees, and at any rate there were rather vociferous complaints that the lead needed to contain more information that would be useful to a "non-expert" reader. I would value any comments that you could make. Thanks,
552:
707:
The discussion there had its tense moments for me, but my anxiety was unrelated to the current discussion of the exterior algebra lead. (Indeed, it seems like a relief to be working in a definite constructive direction, rather than engaging in pointless abstract debate about how things ought to be
187:
Hm, looks like I should have written 2^{2-m} instead of 2^{2+m}. Good catch! In the current revision, though, I don't understand the logic anymore: what does the last bit "with m chosen so that p bits of precision is attained." mean? I would prefer the previous wording (of course, with the correct
916:
was another, although he changed his view on this, I suspect under the influence of his co-author Wright. That proves that mathematicians aren't really all that good at history. And maybe most historians aren't so good at mathematics, so they don't work on this either. My joint paper with
689:, it is a well-done article and we could be happy if all our pages were this detailed etc. On a more general level I feel that many of the general-theory-makers don't seem to engage in writing outstanding articles, which seems to limit their qualification to bash other editors.
835:(the formatting code you are complaining about). It does not use png images; it merely prevents line breaks, and sets the variables in a nicer serif font than the default sans-serif (in which it can be very difficult to distinguish l from I from |). —
625:, especially the new lead, please? This is an article that I have been wanting to bring up to scratch for some time, but there doesn't really to have been much broad interest in doing so until now following a discussion at
851:
I personally dislike what you call "nicer". I don't want to start again one of these fruitless formatting discussions, but I think it is fair standard not to change the whole article's formatting without talking?
911:
was an extraordinarily bad edit. That Euclid's proof was by contradiction is false and is unfair to Euclid. It is true that quite a few respectable mathematicians assert this. Dirichlet was one of those.
607:
926:
658:
895:
861:
719:
698:
770:
449:
398:
384:
262:
105:
778:
762:
457:
441:
270:
254:
113:
94:
621:
I know you're an algebraist with a talent for making articles accessible to a wider audience (or at least "better" in many different ways). Could you have a look at
219:
197:
786:
465:
278:
121:
433:
917:
Catherine
Woodgold demolishes the myth and also shows why the proof by contradiction is inferior to the one that Euclid wrote. I've cited it in the article.
738:
417:
238:
78:
70:
815:
494:
307:
903:
675:
640:
150:
589:
537:
746:
425:
362:
246:
86:
844:
754:
181:
329:
522:
and did a lot of other changes, some of which are noted on the article talk-page (transcluded from GA review) and in the edit summaries.
357:
was a natural way to quantify the strength of evidence for a proposition (using a binomial model); see the end of the article on the
649:
wrote an article called "The exterior algebra of invariant theory", which might interest you all (2nd person plural). Best regards,
542:
803:
482:
295:
138:
727:
406:
227:
59:
525:
Thanks again for your great suggestions and guidance. I appreciate your patience and kind explanations of WP MOS matters.
365:
has a graphical display of various
Fechnerian logarithmic scales, with estimated parameters listed, for various stimuli.)
573:
613:
866:
If you want the same effect with the standard
Knowledge fonts and indistinguishable Il| characters, replace the
715:
671:
636:
499:
794:
473:
286:
129:
161:
886:. It ends up looking the same as using everywhere, but I think it's easier to edit that way. —
857:
694:
603:
193:
908:
654:
585:
533:
380:
210:
article and see if you can fix it. Looks like m is chosen to give you the number of bits you desire.
38:
799:
664:
Thank you for your comments Jakob. I'll respond later on the discussion page in more detail. Best,
577:
513:
500:
478:
291:
134:
47:
17:
891:
840:
779:
23 editors submit evidence in 'Shakespeare' case, Longevity case awaits proposed decision, and more
709:
665:
630:
247:
Anniversary coverage begins; Knowledge as new layer of information authority; inclusionist project
922:
820:
155:
739:
Wikimedia fellow working on cultural collaborations; video animation about
Knowledge; brief news
338:
650:
581:
529:
376:
369:
853:
811:
690:
599:
490:
394:
325:
312:
303:
189:
146:
320:
I have placed your nomination on hold and am looking forward to working with you. Thanks,
8:
887:
836:
358:
918:
682:
626:
215:
177:
350:
207:
169:
747:
The 2002 Spanish fork and ads revisited; Knowledge still failing to fail; brief news
686:
622:
880:
807:
646:
486:
458:
New case: Shakespeare authorship question; lack of recent input in
Longevity case
418:
Anniversary celebrations; Foundation reports; local language problems; brief news
390:
321:
299:
142:
426:
Anniversary coverage continues; Thai government translates
Knowledge; brief news
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
755:
Wikipedians celebrate anniversary with US National
Archives in Washington, D.C.
685:. Don't take these accusations personally! Even if there is lots to improve in
570:
354:
342:
450:
First featured picture from the legally disputed NPG images; two
Chicago icons
164:
for the natural log from the arithmetic-geometric mean? I just changed it in
79:
Record fundraiser celebrated and debated; Board-appointed
Trustees; brief news
870:
828:
517:
346:
211:
173:
913:
434:
Upcoming steward elections, and a retrospective on stewards' work in 2010
551:
172:-- unless I'm just missing why you've got the 2^m in the denominator...
834:(the template I have been using) is not the same thing as <math: -->
509:
I trust that you have recovered from your cold. I have a cold, now. :(
353:
describes human response to stimuli. In particular, he argued that the
389:
Thank you for all of your work. The article passed. Congratulations.
314:
165:
787:
File licensing metadata; Multimedia
Usability project; brief news
271:
World War II case comes to a close; ban appeal, motions, and more
206:
I don't know, I don't have the sources visible. Compare to the
168:, as it appears to conflict with the more complete formula in
372:: A number of other editors have helped a lot the last days.)
239:
Anniversary preparations, new Community fellow, brief news
516:
article, I removed the most egregious violations of the
466:
January Engineering Update; Dutch Hack-a-ton; brief news
681:I have glanced at the accessibility discussion at
368:You must be doubly busy. (Don't worry about the
114:Motion proposed in W/B – Judea and Samaria case
87:Fundraising success media coverage; brief news
361:for references. (Fred Robert's monograph on
279:Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
122:Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
904:Euclid's proof of the infinitude of primes
549:
442:Talking wicket with WikiProject Cricket
14:
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
512:Responding to your GA-review of the
160:Can you check the formula you added
25:
23:
24:
937:
106:Featured sound choice of the year
550:
29:
569:for your exemplary and indeed
13:
1:
927:02:44, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
896:22:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
862:21:56, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
845:21:54, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
816:00:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
720:14:47, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
699:21:45, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
676:19:59, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
659:19:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
641:01:17, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
608:19:27, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
590:01:55, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
538:01:58, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
495:18:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
399:03:59, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
385:00:54, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
330:05:42, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
308:05:13, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
7:
355:logarithm of the likelihood
349:, to argue strongly that a
220:18:27, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
198:12:02, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
182:06:09, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
151:00:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
10:
942:
795:Read this Signpost in full
474:Read this Signpost in full
287:Read this Signpost in full
263:Featured topic of the year
130:Read this Signpost in full
563:The Barnstar of Diligence
559:
18:User talk:Jakob.scholbach
614:Lead of exterior algebra
763:Life Inside the Beltway
255:Her Majesty's Waterways
339:Charles Sanders Peirce
769:Features and admins:
578:Shapley–Folkman lemma
543:Barnstar of diligence
514:Shapley–Folkman lemma
501:Shapley–Folkman lemma
448:Features and admins:
370:Shapley-Folkman lemma
261:Features and admins:
104:Features and admins:
42:of past discussions.
777:Arbitration report:
771:The best of the week
761:WikiProject report:
456:Arbitration report:
440:WikiProject report:
269:Arbitration report:
253:WikiProject report:
112:Arbitration report:
95:Where are they now?
93:WikiProject report:
785:Technology report:
574:Good Article Review
464:Technology report:
359:likelihood function
277:Technology report:
120:Technology report:
363:measurement theory
71:Review of the year
731:: 24 January 2011
595:
594:
432:Sister projects:
410:: 17 January 2011
351:logarithmic scale
231:: 10 January 2011
208:natural logarithm
170:natural logarithm
54:
53:
48:current talk page
933:
885:
879:
875:
869:
833:
827:
737:News and notes:
712:
687:exterior algebra
668:
651:Kiefer.Wolfowitz
633:
623:exterior algebra
582:Kiefer.Wolfowitz
554:
547:
546:
530:Kiefer.Wolfowitz
416:News and notes:
377:Kiefer.Wolfowitz
237:News and notes:
77:News and notes:
69:2010 in review:
63:: 3 January 2011
33:
32:
26:
941:
940:
936:
935:
934:
932:
931:
930:
906:
883:
877:
873:
867:
854:Jakob.scholbach
831:
825:
823:
821:Math formatting
818:
791:
733:
710:
691:Jakob.scholbach
666:
647:Gian-Carlo Rota
631:
616:
600:Jakob.scholbach
545:
519:Manual of Style
504:
497:
470:
412:
318:
310:
283:
233:
190:Jakob.scholbach
158:
156:AGM log formula
153:
126:
65:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
939:
905:
902:
901:
900:
899:
898:
888:David Eppstein
837:David Eppstein
822:
819:
792:
790:
789:
782:
781:
774:
773:
766:
765:
758:
757:
750:
749:
742:
741:
734:
732:
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
711:Sławomir Biały
702:
701:
667:Sławomir Biały
662:
661:
632:Sławomir Biały
615:
612:
611:
610:
593:
592:
566:
565:
560:
558:
556:
544:
541:
528:Best regards,
503:
498:
471:
469:
468:
461:
460:
453:
452:
445:
444:
437:
436:
429:
428:
421:
420:
413:
411:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
375:Best regards,
373:
366:
343:Gustav Fechner
336:
317:
311:
284:
282:
281:
274:
273:
266:
265:
258:
257:
250:
249:
242:
241:
234:
232:
226:
225:
224:
223:
222:
201:
200:
157:
154:
127:
125:
124:
117:
116:
109:
108:
101:
100:
90:
89:
82:
81:
74:
73:
66:
64:
58:
56:
52:
51:
34:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
938:
929:
928:
924:
920:
919:Michael Hardy
915:
910:
897:
893:
889:
882:
872:
865:
864:
863:
859:
855:
850:
849:
848:
846:
842:
838:
830:
817:
813:
809:
805:
801:
797:
796:
788:
784:
783:
780:
776:
775:
772:
768:
767:
764:
760:
759:
756:
752:
751:
748:
745:In the news:
744:
743:
740:
736:
735:
730:
721:
717:
713:
706:
705:
704:
703:
700:
696:
692:
688:
684:
680:
679:
678:
677:
673:
669:
660:
656:
652:
648:
645:
644:
643:
642:
638:
634:
628:
624:
619:
609:
605:
601:
597:
596:
591:
587:
583:
579:
575:
572:
568:
567:
564:
561:
557:
553:
548:
540:
539:
535:
531:
526:
523:
521:
520:
515:
510:
507:
502:
496:
492:
488:
484:
480:
476:
475:
467:
463:
462:
459:
455:
454:
451:
447:
446:
443:
439:
438:
435:
431:
430:
427:
424:In the news:
423:
422:
419:
415:
414:
409:
400:
396:
392:
388:
387:
386:
382:
378:
374:
371:
367:
364:
360:
356:
352:
348:
347:psychophysics
344:
340:
337:
334:
333:
332:
331:
327:
323:
316:
309:
305:
301:
297:
293:
289:
288:
280:
276:
275:
272:
268:
267:
264:
260:
259:
256:
252:
251:
248:
245:In the news:
244:
243:
240:
236:
235:
230:
221:
217:
213:
209:
205:
204:
203:
202:
199:
195:
191:
186:
185:
184:
183:
179:
175:
171:
167:
163:
152:
148:
144:
140:
136:
132:
131:
123:
119:
118:
115:
111:
110:
107:
103:
102:
99:
98:
92:
91:
88:
85:In the news:
84:
83:
80:
76:
75:
72:
68:
67:
62:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
907:
824:
793:
729:The Signpost
728:
663:
620:
617:
562:
555:
527:
524:
518:
511:
508:
505:
472:
408:The Signpost
407:
319:
285:
229:The Signpost
228:
159:
128:
96:
61:The Signpost
60:
55:
43:
37:
914:G. H. Hardy
804:Unsubscribe
800:Single-page
598:Thank you!
506:Hej Jakob!
483:Unsubscribe
479:Single-page
345:'s work on
296:Unsubscribe
292:Single-page
139:Unsubscribe
135:Single-page
36:This is an
808:EdwardsBot
618:Hi Jakob,
487:EdwardsBot
391:Racepacket
322:Racepacket
300:EdwardsBot
188:formula).
143:EdwardsBot
753:WikiXDC:
341:extended
335:Hi Jakob!
315:Logarithm
166:logarithm
212:Dicklyon
174:Dicklyon
576:of the
39:archive
881:nowrap
683:WT:WPM
627:WT:WPM
571:heroic
876:with
97:Redux
16:<
923:talk
909:This
892:talk
871:math
858:talk
841:talk
829:math
812:talk
716:talk
695:talk
672:talk
655:talk
637:talk
604:talk
586:talk
534:talk
491:talk
395:talk
381:talk
326:talk
304:talk
216:talk
194:talk
178:talk
162:here
147:talk
313:GA
925:)
894:)
884:}}
878:{{
874:}}
868:{{
860:)
847::
843:)
832:}}
826:{{
814:)
806:·
802:·
798:·
718:)
697:)
674:)
657:)
639:)
606:)
588:)
580:.
536:)
493:)
485:·
481:·
477:·
397:)
383:)
328:)
306:)
298:·
294:·
290:·
218:)
196:)
180:)
149:)
141:·
137:·
133:·
921:(
890:(
856:(
839:(
810:(
714:(
693:(
670:(
653:(
635:(
602:(
584:(
532:(
489:(
393:(
379:(
324:(
302:(
214:(
192:(
176:(
145:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.