User talk:Mecanismo/Archive 1

Archive 1

August 2009

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at user talk:NawlinWiki. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. →javért ^chat 19:01, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

What is all that about...? Prodego ^talk 19:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Uh, yeah. I'd hate to think that you were a 4chan lemming and deliberately participated in an attack campaign. I'd rather think that someone compromised your account. Please let me know. NawlinWiki (talk) 20:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Samsung SGH-F250

A tag has been placed on Samsung SGH-F250, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Peter Chastain (talk) 00:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Attention Deficit (band)

A tag has been placed on Attention Deficit (band) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Pim Rijkee (talk) 16:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Removing Speedy at The Sugarman 3

Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles you created, as you did with The Sugarman 3. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:

1. Place {{hangon}} on the page. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag(s).
2. Make your case on the article's talk page.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 16:13, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Sugarman 3

A tag has been placed on The Sugarman 3 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 15:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Having tagged dozens, if not hundreds of articles about non-notable bands for speedy deletion, I am very familiar with notability requirements, thank you very much. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 16:24, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I repeat: I am very familiar with the notability requirements, and you have given us absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this band meets them. You've given us no more than an Allmusic reference, and that is by no means sufficient. You'd better start finding some reliable sources really quick, instead of spending your time trying to discredit me. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 16:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Sir: You are trying to evade the requirements that you supply references from independent, reliable sources to back up your assertion that this band is notable. Instead, you are engaging in personal attacks. If you continue, not only will your article be deleted, but you may face being blocked. Quit whining and get to work on the sources! - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 16:42, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

You have completely blown this out of proportion, and have evidently refused to provide any references to back up what you say. I am now reporting you to admins for further action, since nothing else seems to work. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 17:03, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

My reply is on the article talk page. I will confine any further discussion of this to that page, and request you do the same. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 21:24, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of The Sugarman 3

I have nominated The Sugarman 3, an article that you created, for deletion. It is doubtful if this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Sugarman 3. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. DGG ( talk ) 00:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I have also nominated their two records: Sugar's Boogaloo and Soul Donkey (at the same AfD discussion) This is not my usual subject, but I think they could best be discussed together. DGG ( talk ) 00:36, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Refs for Sugarman 3

You can thank User:Gongshow for finding the references to support the band's notability and posting them to the article. If you had done this yourself instead of getting so mad, this whole matter would have never gotten to this point, and I would've gladly removed the deletion notice. Next time, when someone tells you to come up with some references, do it and you'll save everyone a lot of trouble, including yourself. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 01:23, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Homeopathy

Hi. I've reverted your addition of the term "pseudoscience" in the first sentence of the lead. The presence of this word in the lead has been a highly contentious issue even within what is a highly contentious article; there has already been extensive discussion of this and the rest of the wording of the lead on the talk page (see the archives). The current wording already mentions the mainstream view of homoeopathy as pseudoscience or quackery, and while I don't necessarily disagree with this assessment a second use of the word seems a little excessive in the context of a lead. If you think it can be justified please discuss it on the talk page. Regards, Brunton (talk) 22:24, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

DIN 1025

This is an automated message from VWBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of DIN 1025, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.ihs.com/products/industry-standards/org/din/metallurgy-german/index.aspx.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) VWBot (talk) 20:12, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Seed germinator

The article Seed germinator has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Completely unsourced. Fails WP:GNG

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 16:48, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

This is your only warning; if you move a page maliciously again, as you did at M39 cannon, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Discuss this but don't revert. But if you don't want to and you revert it again, be forewarned that a BLOCK is just around the corner. Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 18:32, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of TetGen

The article TetGen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This does not appear to meet the notability requirements, as it lacks significant coverage in independent reliable sources

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  Chzz  ►  22:14, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Pilatus PC-21

• This is about an edit of yours, which I've reverted on the abovementioned article page. Please be informed that DefenceTalk.Com is a forum and is considered as a self-published source, as such, any information extracted from it are usually not permissible for citations on Wikipedia. Also, the information you've added has cited the price of the deal with UAE Air Force, please do not misconstrue it to be the true unit price for the other two customers of Swiss Air Force and Republic of Singapore Air Force. Try to remember that different customers has different set of requirement for avionics/communications suite, these affect the unit prices directly. If you think that I've made an honest mistake, please tell me here so I can make any correction(s), thank you. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 13:32, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Regarding your comment about quoting DefenceTalk.Com, I agree that it was an oversight and that, with that under consideration, it wouldn't be a good idea to quote from it. Regarding quoting the price of the deal with UAE Air Force, your criticism isn't reasonable. Military equipment sales such as this one are always negotiated, and therefore don't correspond to a single fixed price nor fixed requirements. As the article fails to mention any vague reference to an approximate price which these planes go for, I don't believe that quoting a deal which did happen and is widely covered represents, as you've put it, a misinterpretation of the plane's price. In fact, it is quite the opposite: it's the most objective price which can be quoted, as it was the price which someone actually paid to get them -- Mecanismo | Talk 11:02, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

• Firstly, please try to keep our discussion in a single place so that it is easy to follow for the both of us. Secondly, whatever you have quoted above is your own interpretation, and not those of the Wikipedia (per WP:No original research#Synthesis of published material that advances a position). What say you bring this to the discussion page instead, so that you can get more inputs from other editors who can enlighten you further on that topic which I've tried to explained to you. Best. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 11:35, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Regarding where to post replies, posting them in your talk page, which is the standard way users communicate in wikipedia, ensures that you receive and follow the discussion. If I reply to myself by posting a reply on my own talk page then it can be a waste of time, as there is no guarantee that you will be notified.

Regarding your accusation of original research, I believe we can agree that a simple algebra operation doesn't count as original research or made up facts. If we can agree on this, we can also agree that if a source claims that someone purchased 25 planes for 500 million CHF then stating that the average unit price can be around 20 million CHF, which is a simple algebra operation, is also not original research.

Finally, wikipedia is not a monolithic entity nor a single person, only a loose association of users. As a consequence, wikipedia does not and cannot agree on anything. Adding to this, I'm sure you are aware of Wikipedia:Be bold, which doesn't list the implied the alleged authority of an abstract entity over a simple user as a deterrent. -- Mecanismo | Talk 13:16, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

• To be fair, you have all the right to argue all that you want but Wikipedia is not a democracy. Another thing, since I've started a conversation here so it is only logical that I've watchlisted your page in order to better reply you; hence, if you reply on my talk page you're making this discussion process scattered/fragmented, serves no real purpose at all. Finally, I'm done talking to you... it is fine if you want to be bold but please, the policy also says that you can be bold BUT NOT RECKLESS. As a sidenote, I've gotten an Admin to talk to you instead. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 23:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Hello Mecanismo I have been asked by Dave1185 to have a look at the issue around your PC-21 edit and his reversion. First thanks for not edit warring over it that always helps. His concern is that the figure of 20 million CHF each was made up (or original research) is valid, you said 500 divided by 25 gives around 20, true but the 500 figure is for a complete training system not just aircraft. The original source [1] says over 500 million so it is not an accurate figure to start with as for simulators it doesnt say how many or what type - a typical suite of military training simulators can be the same as one aircraft. It also mentions it included logistics support - not cheap either but doesnt say what kind of support, a full contractor logistic support package can be very expensive. So it would be reasonable to say that the UAE aircraft, training and support was bought for over 500 million the rest is just guess work. Also note it is best to keep discussions in one place although in this case it may have been better to use the article talk page. Unless you have any questions can we all move on now, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 09:27, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

LNP

Widely What? --BjKa (talk) 13:25, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Open Sound System, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ubuntu (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Disappearing information

Hi Mecanismo. Your last four edits of List of finite element software packages comprise only removal of items you seem to deem uncyclopaedic, but unfortunately they also seem to have caused the disappearing of otherwise very useful information, as several of the software packages mentioned there before, are not there anymore :/. Please edit items to meet standards instead of completely deleting them. 80.232.11.13 (talk) 17:11, 3 January 2012 (UTC) (ovikholt at gmail dot com)

How do I edit images uploaded to Wikipedia?

I've stumbled on File:Prestressed concrete en.svg, and the picture has some incorrections which I would like to fix. Yet, I don't know how to commit those changes to wikipedia's version. Does anyone know how to do this? Thanks in advance --Mecanismo | Talk 18:43, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

The file is in Scalable Vector Graphics format, so first you will need the proper software to edit that file type. You'll also note that the file is not stored on the English Wikipedia - it is actually stored on Commons at commons:File:Prestressed concrete en.svg. Before attempting to update the file, though, you will need an account on commons and you should familiarize yourself with their unique rules and practices - see commons:Welcome. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:26, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Nokia Lumia 800 appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this. Thank you. Request you to adhere to WP:NPOV and avoid WP:SYN. You may discuss at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard or Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard if you are not sure. Thanks. TheMandarin (talk) 04:18, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Mecanismo, reintroducing material which fails WP:NPOV and which is WP:OR by edit warring will not help. Please see the discussion instead of edit warring. Thanks. --TheMandarin (talk) 15:58, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Comparison of FTP server software, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages SCP and SFTP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:44, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Falklands War - linebreaks

Hi, just a quick regarding the linebreaks you reintroduced. I left those between paragraphs in, but removed those between references because, while I see your point about it making diffs more readable, it has the unfortunate side-effect of causing spaces to appear between citations in the main body. Hope that's ok. - Chrism would like to hear from you 18:58, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Plate (structure)

The article Plate (structure) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced stub

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Salimfadhley (talk) 19:56, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

Hi. When you recently edited Toxoplasma gondii, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Depression (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:10, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Samsung SGH-F250

The article Samsung SGH-F250 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:MILL cellphone; no sources, no demonstration of notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Keφr (talk) 12:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Samsung SGH-F250

The article Samsung SGH-F250 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unsourced article about a WP:MILL cellphone; notability not established

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Keφr (talk) 10:50, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Removal of related information about the Coppersmith–Winograd algorithm from Feb 2012

Mecanismo,

First of all, I agree with the invisible reformatting of the page, a change which mediates visually convenient revision-comparisons. Based on the way you rephrased sentences, I sense that you have your own refined "canonical narrative style" when describing math-related topics. However, I feel that you have removed useful information regarding the technique used in Virginia William's proof. It so happens that I was at her job talk for Stanford, and that I read her paper.

I felt that my description of her approach (regarding optimization and tensor powers) is succinct and accurate, and provides the right intuition. I am very disappointed that you removed the material, in part because I spent much time choosing my words and omissions.

Please add some appropriate information about Williams' approach back to the page; I felt that her approach was non-traditional and warrants some description. It is also especially relevant to the approach taken by Coppersmith-Winograd. The information about Virginia Williams' approach does not have to be my original wording: I recognize that perhaps you are very committed to how you narrate.

--Liuyipei (talk) 23:24, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Samsung SGH-F250 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Samsung SGH-F250 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samsung SGH-F250 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Keφr (talk) 05:00, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Multiplication in LaTeX

Hi Mecanismo, Thanks for you contribution to Taylor series. One suggestion: for the multiplication dot in LaTeX, use "\cdot" instead of "." -- it has better placement and spacing. All e best. --JBL (talk) 14:49, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Field of fire (weaponry) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Field of fire (weaponry) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Field of fire (weaponry) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Toddst1 (talk) 12:27, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Order of a polynomial, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Springer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

an filter...

is not grammatical. If you are going to revert me, please have the courtesy to fix my complaint. SpinningSpark 14:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of B.C. Rich Mockingbird

The article B.C. Rich Mockingbird has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A poorly written, poorly sourced article.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 07:44, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mecanismo. You have new messages at I dream of horses's talk page.
Message added 19:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disambiguation link notification for September 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Laplace-Carson transform, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Function (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:55, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Laplace–Carson transform

You created a page titled Laplace-Carson transform, with a hyphen rather than an en-dash, where there was already a page titled Laplace–Carson transform, with an en-dash rather than a hyphen, which redirected to Sumudu transform. It doesn't make sense to have Laplace–Carson transform redirecting to Sumudu transform when there's a page on the Laplace–Carson transform. And there were no articles that linked to Laplace-Carson transform (with a hyphen) but at least two pages linked to Laplace–Carson transform, thereby redirecting to Sumudu transform. I've changed the article's title to Laplace–Carson transform because WP:MOS requires an en-dash rather than a hyphen in this context. I've also added to the article the statement that it's named after Pierre Simon Laplace and John Renshaw Carson, with links to those articles. Generally, that should be included. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Notation for differentiation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nabla (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

DRN case closed

Hello, I am Jaaron95, a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. You recently filed a request or were a major party in the DRN case titled "Talk:Order of a polynomial#Disambiguating". Unfortunately, the case was closed regardless because there was not enough discussion. When these issues have been addressed, you may refile the DRN request or open a thread on another noticeboard as appropriate. If you have any questions please contact me on my talk page or at the DRN talk page. Thank you! --—☮JAaron95 ^Talk 16:11, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

• Additional comments by volunteer: None

Nomination of Order of a polynomial for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Order of a polynomial is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Order of a polynomial until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. D.Lazard (talk) 10:48, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Newton–Cotes formulas

Lutf9732 (talk) 15:14, 7 November 2015 (UTC)Hi Mecanismo, since you have edited the topic in the headline on wikipedia. It seems like the formulas differ from the ones given on link given below , please suggest which ones are correct. Thanks

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Kahler tremolo system.JPG

A tag has been placed on File:Kahler tremolo system.JPG requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:10, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

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) 12:48, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Mini-jobs listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mini-jobs. Since you had some involvement with the Mini-jobs redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 16:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Mini jobs listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mini jobs. Since you had some involvement with the Mini jobs redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Si Trew (talk) 16:20, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mecanismo. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mecanismo. 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. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Schöneiche bei Berlin tramway

The article Schöneiche bei Berlin tramway has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable tram system. No WP:reliable sources with significant coverage to pass WP:GNG.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:31, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Schöneiche bei Berlin tramway for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Schöneiche bei Berlin tramway is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schöneiche bei Berlin tramway until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:03, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Schöneiche bei Berlin tramway, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tramway. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:42, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Mecanismo. 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, Mecanismo. 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)

Disambiguation link notification for November 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited JQuery, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ajax (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 23 November 2021 (UTC)