User talk:AdamSmithee/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, AdamSmithee/Archive 1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Dakota ^t ^e 07:16, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sergiu Nicolaescu

Salut, I've tried to remove the vandalsims and the obvious POV's, but for the moment my knowledge about him stops right there. I've seen that you have some good contributions regarding the cinematography in Romania, and as I try to improve the article about Culture of Romania I would appreciate some help with the cinematography part. Thx --Orioane 12:07, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian Wikipedian's notice board

Poate vrei sa arunci un ochi pe notice board-ul romanilor de acilea Wikipedia:Romanian Wikipedian's notice board --Mihai -^talk 21:03, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Orioane's RfA

Hey AdamSmithee/Archive 1! Thank you very much for your support on my RfA. To my amazement there were no negative or neutral votes and the result was (28/0/0). I am now an administrator so I'll try and do my best in this new position. I'll be happy to answer any comments or requests from you. Mulţumesc încă odată, Mihai -^talk 20:23, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Tre să facem ceva cu cinematografia românească.

Thanks

Salut dom'le! Multam pentru ajutor la Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange.

(Hi there, and thanks for helping out with Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange.) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And note that it is good if you make the status line bold, and sign, like this. Then, a bot will automatically add your name as a contributor, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange#Credits to people who contributed so far. PS: Do you happen to know the user which signs the posts with Just a tag? You can reply here, I will keep your talk page on my watchlist. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 18:27, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Salut! Thanks for the tips. I looked around and saw that you use a bot for automatic update, but I didn't know what it needs to identify modifications. It's really fun editing WP, but unfortunatelly I didn't really have that much time for it, especially for the math articles (they do require a bit more attention :-)). But now that I found the Plante Math Exchange, this looks like a good place to start contributing more to math related articles. - AdamSmithee 19:47, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bot counting

Salut! I did what you said and the bot still doesn't count it. I don't know what I'm doing wrong... Maybe you can help me with further advice? PS: I have no idea about Just a Tag. AdamSmithee 19:30, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it counts. Check out carefully the WP:PMEX main page and the tables. You are in. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 20:23, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The table shows 8 Rv articles under 12 Field theory and polynomials. But if you look in the section, there are actually 20 reviewed articles. On the other hand, it doesn't really matter, it's important for me to do the task, whether the table reflects it or not (and for other articles there is no statistic). But it's kind of nice to get a sense of the progress being made and of the progress that needs to be made :-). Anyway, if I'm wrong or I'm right but it's difficult to fix, just don't loose time over it - AdamSmithee 21:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It shows 20 now. :) I didn't do anything. :) Note that under the table there is a link to refresh the data, in case you did not notice. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:57, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, magic!:-) I noticed it, but didn't seem to work. Possibly something wrong with my browser or whatever. Ah well... I'm glad that it works now :-) - AdamSmithee 23:54, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Romania's accession to EU

Why you think is misleading? Talk:Accession of Romania to the European Union.

The introductive part is misleading. It needs to adress the safegard clause -- Bonaparte talk 20:19, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The introductive part states and emphasizes that the accession date is firmly decided to be 1 Jan 2007. Actually, as far as I know, this is not so clear cut. There is a safeguard clause which allows EU to delay Romania's and Bulgaria's accession one year. The beginning of the article should mention this - AdamSmithee 21:07, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As long as the official treaty of adherence state that 1st of January 2007 is the date of joining the EU, we will let it like this. Of course we can add a short note about your info with that clause. Bonaparte talk 21:53, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That is what I meant. Sorry if I wasn't clear. I think that the information that is there is very good, just add a note about the clause. - AdamSmithee 22:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would be very happy if you'll do it. It's an open article and should be of a great interest for Romanians. Bonaparte talk 11:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Although it "should be of a great interest for Romanians", I didn't consider it fun enough to actually search the specific details needed. Besides, my impression is that some things, considered negative, have been intentionally not mentioned, so I thought I should go first to the talk page. Anyway, if you want to ignore my suggestion, please feel free. - AdamSmithee 18:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pruning the movie lists!

Thanks for helping out with the notable movie list! It's great to have another editor that I don't have to "look over the shoulder of" to make sure that they aren't removing items from the lists that shouldn't be. Your work is really appreciated. --Reflex Reaction (talk)• 14:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Films based on books

I am so glad that you have signed up. Keep an eye on the To do list. We could use the help. If you know anyone else who has some time and the patience to add the categories to or alter current categories in articles, please send them over.

Lady Aleena 07:59, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:NaeCaranfil.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:NaeCaranfil.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. -- Carnildo 19:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary request

Hi Adam. Just a request. It is good to use an edit summary more often, it helps others understand what you changed. Thanks. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 04:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sorry, I will. I know that you are right and that I should use it more often, but sometimes I get too lazy. Just curious though, what was the edit that made you feel this request is necessary? AdamSmithee 07:59, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 23:09, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right :-) AdamSmithee 08:38, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NimbleX

Welcome to Wikipedia Bogdan! I wikified the article on NimbleX because I thought someone (other than yourself) just copied all of the info from the NX site! Later, I found out it was you! But Wikipedia must stick to a NPOV (neutral point of view) and the article sounded like an advertisement, so that is why I wikified it. Please view the newer version here. Please add some of the software that comes with it to a newer features heading. Thank you.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I really did not edit NimbleX. I wonder what made you think it was me? AdamSmithee 07:32, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

View the author here and you'll see what I mean. He was an impersonator, I presume. Эйрон Кинни 07:35, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bogdan and Radulescu are quite common first and, respectively, last names in Romania :-). He is someone else who, incidently, has the same name as I do. Sorry, but it was really not me. Look, for example, at my edit history, and you will see that I have no edits related to IT. Also, I know (next to) nothing about Linux. AdamSmithee 07:40, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see. That's why your handle alludes to Adam Smith. Sorry for the inconvenience, I apologize. Эйрон Кинни 08:06, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes :-D. No problem, I didn't mind AdamSmithee 17:42, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject game theory

Hi Adam - Thanks for your contributions to Strategy (game theory). If you're interested we have Wikipedia:WikiProject Game theory where we are trying to develop coverage of game theory topics. Feel free to join in! --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 20:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MathCOTW

Polynomial identity ring

The current Mathematics Collaboration of the Month is
Polynomial identity ring.

Please help to improve this article towards featured article standard.

Last month's collaboration was Group (mathematics)

In case you have time to contribute after all :) Meekohi 03:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I'll try AdamSmithee 19:41, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New project over at Films based on books

Greetings! I put together a list of stub articles that need to be split into separate book and film articles and posted it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Films based on books/Splits. Feel free to take a crack at it. Her Pegship 13:28, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Horror

Are there many Romanian horror movies? Just out of curiosity I tried looking on IMDb. It had only Domnisoara Christina (1996), but then a number of others either partly shot there or with some Romanian spoken in them. Шизомби 22:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, no significant Ro horror movies. Actually, almost no horror Romanian movies at all. Because of scarce funding, after the end of the communist regime in Romania relatively few movies were made and, horror being seen by most Romanian filmmakers as a second tier genre, these were generally not horror (during communist times no horrors were made AFAIK - probably didn't fit with working class moral :-)). Again AFAIK, the extremely few RO horror movies made were extremely low quality, as Dracula the Impaler for instance. I really have no idea about Domnisoara Christina, other than the fact that it is probably based on a famous horror short story by Mircea Eliade. Probably the film didn't have appropriate distribution (again the lack of funding...) AdamSmithee 22:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikiproject Horror/Collaboration of the month

Hi! I noticed your name on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Horror membership list and am writing to all members who have not voted for the Collaboration of the month. Today is the designated selection day to choose the collaboration, but we currently have a tie between the two articles receiving the most votes, John Carpenter and Dario Argento. I am hoping to remedy this by drumming up a few more votes. Note that by voting for any nominated article (not limited to these two) you are indicating your "commitment to support and aid in collaborating on that specific article if it is chosen," so please feel absolutely free to ignore this message if for any reason you don't wish or would not be able to participate.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:47, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intermediate value property

After I've created intermediate value property (as a redirect to Darboux function) I've seen that you had it in your TODO list. This entry defines the intermediate value property, so I find it ok; but if you have better suggestion feel free to change it. --Kompik 06:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Caligari music

I see you added "Music by" information to The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920 film). Since this is a silent film, are you refering to a score that was originally released with it, or music that was added later (for, say, the DVD release)? Regards, --Jeremy Butler 12:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to what I found, Giuseppe Becce composed the original score for the movie [1], which according to IMDb was used for the world premiere. Unfortunatelly the score was later lost [2],[3]. AdamSmithee 14:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. --Jeremy Butler 10:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of film with no infobox

Hello! May I ask why you removed my addition to the list of films that need infoboxes? What is the preferred method of letting other editors know that a film article needs an infobox? I tried using the category listed on that page, Category:Needs film infobox, but it doesn't exist. Aguerriero (talk) 22:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I removed it because that is not a general project for giving film articles infoboxes. That project(Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/List of notable films) is specifically designed to standardise and improve somewhat the films already on the original list (notable films, defined as films appearing in verious 'best films' tops). As the film you mentioned (The Mask (film)) is not part of those acclaimed filmes, it didn't make it in the project and shouldn't be included now. In a nutshell, the idea of the project is to solve the problems with existing films, not to add indiscriminetly new film articles, which would deviate and disrupt the project.

My two cents on what to do about The Mask or other films that do not have an infobox: the first (and best) option would be to give them an infobox yourself. Secondly, you could leave a note at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films talk page, though it might not do much good, because most of the editors there are aware that many films don't have infoboxes. Third, you could try starting some Category:Needs film infobox or a subproject for putting film infoboxes...

In the end, I'm sorry I had to remove it, but that is really not the place to put it. Anyway, I'll try putting an infobox at The Mask myself later today. AdamSmithee 11:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying - I get it now. I will work on establishing an easier way to track all articles that don't have infoboxes. It seems that there used to be a category but it may have been deleted. I just happened upon it while I was working on our worklist for Wikipedia 1.0. Aguerriero (talk) 14:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Class=x vs. Class=X

Just for future notice when you assess an article make sure to capitalize the class=Start/Stub/B so It shows up on Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Film articles by quality. If you feel like helping out you could adopt a section at the FilmsWikiProject page. Andman8 02:44, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right. You know, I was wondering why it didn't work and why none of my assessed articles showed up... Thanks a lot for the notice. I've just adopted section 3 AdamSmithee 23:47, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We should work from Category:Unassessed film articles here. Starting with all the "A" Letter Movies. --

Shane ^{(talk/contrib)} 19:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

math books

I saw your question on the WikiProject:Math page about good math books. If you're still looking for some good ones, try, as 127 said, books published by Dover. They tend to be older, but cheap. Specifically, I bought Kreyszig's Differential Geometry and Hocking and Young's Topology before graduate school and found them both readable. They're also important topics, which can be difficult to tell sometimes. If you get through Hocking and Young, download Allen Hatcher's Algebraic Topology. It's free for individual use, and extremely good, but it does assume roughly what you'd find in Hocking and Young. Good luck reading math books. If you get stuck, go back to the last part you understood and start over. Math needs to be read twice. Originalbigj 03:04, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your help! Actually, though I got many answers, you are the only one which gave me what I need: specific titles. On Diff. geometry I got my hands on Boothby's "An Introduction to Differentiable Manifolds and Riemannian Geometry" which was really good (and I was lucky enough to find it for free). Do you happen to know how Kreyszig is compared to that? (math really needs reading twice, and different sources definitely helps :-)). I will definitely get Hocking and Young, especially taking into account that my topology is rather weak. If you have other good math titles for me, please go ahead. Anyway, thanks a lot again AdamSmithee 09:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nobel medal template

I direct you to User:Bunzil who was inserting the Nobel medal template, which I learned about from him. If this is an issue, the template can be blanked. --Ancheta Wis 17:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Films Assessment

I see that you are working on assessing the films from Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Film articles by quality. As of right now, I am taking these films and transfering them to Lists of films (by letter) since the list is pretty empty compared to the number of films out there. I don't plan on assessing films for the higher classes as that will take too much time for me. I would like to assist a little in the assessment, but I have a few questions. Do I just add the assessment for stub, future class, etc. to the {{FilmsWikiProject}} and that's it? Or do I need to move the film I graded to another page? Is it automatically moved by MathBot, or is it done by the user? Again, I would probably only be grading films as either stubs or future class. Please tell me the basic step-by-step process so I can assist the project as I take part in my own project. Thanks for the help. --Nehrams2020 08:42, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for answering late, but I was on vacation and I didn't have computer access. The procedure for assessment is very simple: just add to the FilmsWikiProject tag |class=Stub or |class=Future and so on, as in {{FilmsWikiProject|class=Stub}} (note the capital letter on Stub, Future) and MathBot will do the rest. As a matter of fact, no page moving is involved, adding the |class= will automatically include the article in the appropriate category, and MathBot will do the changes on Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Film articles by quality. AdamSmithee 19:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back to me, I was starting to wonder if the question was too stupid or something. But thanks for the answer, and I'll start chiseling away at it as I work on the list of films page. Thanks again. --Nehrams2020 19:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai

Hello! You marked Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai as a Start-class article a couple of weeks ago. However, I'd be ready to tag it as a Good Article myself. Can you explain your reasons for selecting this class (preferably on the talk page of the film)? --ZeroOne 19:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for asking, that is very considerate of you. I'll post some comments on my assessment on the film's talk page, but before, I'll make a point here. Probably you are not aware (which is perfectly normal), but the Good Article tag is reserved for articles which have passed the Wikipedia procedure for being granted Good Article status. This is not the case for Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai, which makes this particular class inappropriate for it. You can find further information on criteria at Category:Film articles by quality and Wikipedia:What is a good article?. However, you have a good question, if you reformulate it as Why not assess it as B- or even A- class?, which I'll try to answer on the article's talk page AdamSmithee 20:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I actually read the guidelines and did know that for the GA status you need a nomination process. So yes, I should've reformulated my question. However, I was just trying to make a point. :) I added something to the Ghost Dog article now, based on your comments on the article's talk page. I am not so much into film articles in general so I missed the obvious sections you pointed out and understand the Start-labeling now. Thanks for taking the time to respond! --ZeroOne 23:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vino la pagina de discutii Transnistria

În 17 septembrie va fi referendum în Transnistria legat de independenţa regiunii. Cu această ocazie probabil multă lume va căuta pe Wikipedia informaţii despre Transnistria. Am încercat să adaug în articol nişte informaţii legate de acest referendum, anume:

- faptul că mai multe organizaţii antiseparatiste au lansat un apel la boicotare, considerînd referendumul "farsă"

- faptul că din 46 de ţări membre ale Consiliului Europei, 45 sînt împotriva recunoaşterii referendumului, numai RUsia are altă părere

- faptul că datele Comisiei Electorale Centrale din Tiraspol au fost schimbate în mod ciudat, anume numărul total de alegători s-a micşorat cu 7% faţă de 2005, ceea ce ridică suspiciuni asupra unei încercări de creştere artificială a prezenţei la vot prin raportarea unui număr mai mic de alegători înregistraţi.

Totdeauna am dat lincurile care dovedesc cele scrise de mine, n-am născocit nimic din burtă.

Userul Willian Mauco, care pare fan Tiraspol, mereu mi-a şters adăugirile. (vezi istoria paginii)

Puteţi vedea la pagina de discuţii Transnistria ce argumente a adus. Anume: ăia care cer boicotarea referendumului din Transnistria sînt foşti KGB-işti, că aşa zice o organizaţie rusească de analiză (a dat un linc pentru asta). Întîi a spus că respectivii nici nu sînt din Transnistria, ci doar din Basarabia, dar i-am dovedit că unii dintre semnatarii apelului la boicot sînt transnistreni. Am fost împăciuitor, i-am zis că n-are decît să adauge părerea organizaţiei ruseşti că antiseparatiştii sînt foşti KGBişti, că n-are decît să-i considere pe cei care vor boicotarea referendumului drept băieţi răi, dar faptul în sine, că s-a cerut boicotarea referendumului, trebuie menţionat. Degeaba, mereu mi s-au şters adăugirile - pentru celelalte 2 fapte nici n-a adus argumente.

A mai fost o adăugire care a şters-o, despre arestarea a 4 persoane din Transnistria care sînt împotriva separatismului (între timp li s-a dat drumul). În cazul ăsta am renunţat eu să mai insist pentru includerea informaţiei în articol (deşi informaţia e incontestabilă), tocmai fiindcă n-am vrut să mă cert prea mult.

În perioada asta cînd agenţiile de ştiri vor menţiona referendumul de la Tiraspol, se va citi articolul Transnistria în Wikipedia poate mai mult decît într-un an întreg. De aia acum e nevoie să existe în articol informaţii despre contestarea corectitudinii referendumului. Nu cer să se menţioneze ca adevăr absolut faptul că referendumul e incorect, ci doar că există unii (OSCE, 45 din 46 ţări ale Consiliului Europei, unele organizaţii din zonă şi din Basarabia) care consideră asta. Vă cer de aceea sprijinul ca să interveniţi pe pagina de discuţii Transnistria pentru a susţine rămînerea informaţiei în pagină şi să repuneţi informaţia atunci cînd Mauco o şterge (eu nu pot să verific chiar 24 de ore din 24). Evitaţi atacurile suburbane, păstraţi ton civilizat. mulţumesc.

Who is William Mauco Here is an article about a Wikipedia celebrity, William Mauco, and his relations with the International Council for Democratic Institutions and State Sovereignty (ICDISS), an organisation "which seems to be a front organisation for a Kremlin-backed rogue statelet called Transdniestria" (quote from the article) http://0.bypass-filter.com/index.php?q=aHR0cDovL2Vkd2FyZGx1Y2FzLmJsb2dzcG90LmNvbS8yMDA2LzA4L2dvdGNoYS0yLmh0bWw%3D

Edward Lucas wrote about Mauco: "The other lead is William Mauco. He has an extensive record of posting intelligent and fairly neutral entries on Wikipedia, not only about TD but about other unrecognised statelets. Crucially, these predate ICDISS's birthday of January 2006. And he also claims to have been at their conference in Mexico City in April of this year. I have written to him asking to get in touch, and had a friendly email in reply. I am planning to follow up this research in an article in European Voice at the end of August, so watch this space!"--MariusM 08:35, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eigenvalue, eigenvector and eigenspace

Hi there. You commented extensively on this page here during its review period. It's at decision time regarding whether its FA status should be removed. If you'd like to post a comment on its present condition, please do so soon. Cheers, Marskell 19:02, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fermat's theorem (stationary points)

Hi AdamSmithee!

I've asked a question about the proof of Fermat's theorem on Talk:Fermat's theorem (stationary points). Would you be so kind to take a look at on it? Thanks: Mozó 80.99.182.157 15:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I wonder why PlanetMath added this extra, global continuity assumption to the theorem. Maybe, they restricted their operations to "nice functions". Mozó 80.99.182.157 06:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks for noticing! I basically copy-pasted the statement and concentrated on writing th3e intuition and proof parts, so I missed the extre assumption (though I turned it into a link :-))AdamSmithee 07:56, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:KennethArrow.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:KennethArrow.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

LSTAR and STAR models

Thanks for your input into categorizing these models - As much as I agree that stochastic processes is a broad category, I must admit that I see LSTAR and STAR models as parts of it. If we have time series models in it we should also have nonlinear time series.--Jinxs 18:27, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, but the thing is, time series are a subcat of stochastic processes. So, as long as STAR (for instance) is part of time series, it is part of the stochastic processes cat. I just wanted to avoid redundencies. My thinking was to put models used to represent/approx/estimate the laws of "underlying" stochastic processes in the time series cat, and leave the rest directly in stoch. processes. AdamSmithee 23:21, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK - sorry for misunderstanding - I'm still learning Wikipedia. As for Star vs. STAR issue - you are right again - it should be capitalized - it's just that I don't know how to do it. Any help would be appreciated.--Jinxs 11:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for discussing with me the issue. For Star vs. STAR, I'll change it now, but the general procedure would be as follows: use the "Move" button on top of the article (next to "History") to move it to the new name, then add a redirect. AdamSmithee 11:51, 25 October 2006 (UTC) Done. It seems that you don't even need to add the redirect, it is done automatically :-) AdamSmithee 11:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Strangelove

If you have seen the film more recently than me, can you help me decide if the two sections I isolated from the plot as "Historical parallels" are mentioned in the film (see film's Talk page). They look non-plot to me. There are sections further down I could move them, if I am right. Hoverfish 22:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to nail the extent of Sellers' improvisation.... further to your comment on the talk page, is "the idea that he improvised the entire phone call in the war room" actually mentioned in the article, or was it ever mentioned? I might be being dense, but I can't find it (admittedly, I've only searched for key words like improv and phone in the current version and a few former versions, rather than troubling to actually read the damn things). It's fairly clear that he did improvise some of the call, and I'd like to mention this. TheMadBaron 07:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Milton Friedman

I replied on my talk page. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 02:44, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Collaboration... next?

According to the template on the collaboration page the next one should be on since yesterday and I think it should be Psycho, but I'm not sure how to proceed. Hoverfish 00:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC) Actually I made some changes so that it becomes clear when the next collaboration starts. Hoverfish 09:22, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for having messed up your schedual with my change, but just for the record:

File:Film Reel Series by Bubbels.jpg

You voted for the Cinema Collaboration of the week, and it has been chosen as

Psycho (1960 film).

Please help improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia film article.

Maybe there's something left for when you get back. Hoverfish 01:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CineVoter

File:Film Reel Series by Bubbels.jpg

You voted for the Cinema Collaboration of the week, and it has been chosen as

Pulp Fiction (film).

Please help improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia film article.

Cbrown1023 23:51, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CineVoter

File:Film Reel Series by Bubbels.jpg

You voted for the Cinema Collaboration of the week, and it has been chosen as

.

Please help improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia film article.

Cbrown1023 04:00, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:RayDavis.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:RayDavis.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. MECU≈talk 16:31, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]