User talk:218.133.184.93

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Chen prime

I reverted your edit [1] about "TG prime" (short for "Tao-Green prime"?) because the term doesn't appear to be used (I couldn't find any reference). If you can satisfy WP:RS then I suggest discussing it here or on Talk:Chen prime. Even with a reference, the term may be too non-notable to mention. PrimeHunter 19:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Number-theoretic function

Please stop. If you continue to delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, you will be blocked.

Please stop blanking the Number-theoretic function redirect page; blanking pages is usually considered vandalism. There are references in arithmetic function to two published books giving the definition of number-theoretic function presented there. You can verify these via google books if you like. If there are other print sources that have a different defintion, please feel free to add this fact to the article.

The list of anonymous contributions from this IP is very respectable; you seem to add useful facts to many articles. I hope that you will continue to help constructively rather than disrupt by blanking pages. CMummert · talk 17:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Zermelo

Hi, I changed the reference to Zermelo you added to Chess. From my point of view, the result itself is not specifically interesting for the article (add it to Game theory, this is the proper place of the citation, I think), but perhaps the fact that Zermelo used chess as an example and that it was already in 1913, some thirty years before von Neumann. Happy editing, --Ioannes Pragensis 08:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] computability

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. We hope you like it here and decide to stay.

You may wish to consider getting a username and logging in to avoid confusion with other editors. You don't have to log in to read or edit articles on Wikipedia, but creating an account is quick, requires no personal information, is free, and provides you with many benefits. When you edit without logging in, your IP address is used to identify you.

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

I noticed you have been adding some facts to computability articles. I hope that you keep working on them, because they have a lot of issues. Please take care to integrate your additions into the article that is already there, rather than just adding them to the end of a section. You might also want to inquire on the article talk pages if the article seems to be structured in a strange manner or seems to use strange terminology. CMummert · talk 14:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Limit superior and limit inferior

Would you please bother to explain at talk:Limit superior and limit inferior what is not correct, rather than deleting content from the page? Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 14:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copeland–Erdős_constant

Hello. Please explain why you repeatedly remove the mathworld link on Copeland–Erdős_constant. Also, you claim that this "analogue" section is from Hardy and Wright, p. 113. This is not true of the fifth edition which is referenced in this article. Please explain. Finally, please use edit summaries to explain your edits. This is a simple courtesy to other editors. Thanks. Doctormatt 01:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to blank out (or delete portions of) page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did to Copeland–Erdős_constant, you will be blocked from editing. DavidCBryant 21:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ramanujan prime. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. -- Avi 01:31, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reveting

Please stop reverting. You'll get blocked. Use the talk page. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 15:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Division rings

This is wrong, not every integral domain is a division ring. The integers are an integral domain, but not a division ring. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:01, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Group 3RR warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Group (mathematics). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:23, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copeland–Erdős constant 14RR + vandalism

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Copeland–Erdős constant. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:17, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

This is your only warning.
The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to Copeland–Erdős constant, you will be blocked from editing. Elenseel 21:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

There seem to be no uninvolved admins around at the moment. I'd like to propose a permanent ban, but I think it may only be a month this time. (The assertion on this talk page that the IP is not fixed seems incorrect, as all of the contributions from it have been in keeping with WAREL's errors in understanding the real world. )— Arthur Rubin | (talk) 23:28, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
Is a long-term non-soft block on this IP appropriate? The banner at the top says it's shared... —David Eppstein 23:43, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I've seen no evidence that there are any edits which cannot be considered WAREL's; i.e., adding unverified or removing verified information about at most semi-notable Japanese, adding or removing links to :ja, and adding nonsense to mathematics articles. No, I think it's one person. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 23:46, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
The edit history does look like WAREL alone for almost a year, I agree. I suppose you can just block and deal with it in the unlikely case that someone else wants to edit from that address later. —David Eppstein 23:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with the exact history, here, but it's clear this user is well past 3RR and should be aware of the policy (warned and previously blocked over it), so I've gone ahead and applied a 48hr block on those grounds. I don't know enough to have an informed opinion on any allegation of sockpuppetry, at this time. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:59, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Skewes' number

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on Skewes' number. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing. Owen× ☎ 21:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism again

In what sense are the reals not consistent? RCF is complete and decidable. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Riemann hypothesis

This edit is just wrong. \epsilon=\frac 1 2 is obviously an example. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 18:45, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

And before you add "the exact value of ε is unknown", that's obvious from this being the Riemann hypothesis, rather than Riemann's theorem. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 18:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I blocked you for 24 hours. Your behavior may lead to an indefinite block. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 01:02, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Big O notation

If you don't agree with something, please discuss, rather than keeping reverting. Doing more of reverting will just get you blocked again. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 05:04, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I replied on my talk page. 15:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oleg Alexandrov (talk • contribs)
I blocked you for 48 hours for repeateadly revert warring at Big O notation‎ and preferring to keep on reverting while refusing to discuss the issue. The next block may be longer. Once again, please discuss, don't just revert. Also, your point is moot, everybody knows what 'max' is. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 17:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Would it bother you to know what 'max' is? 218.133.184.93 17:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Please explain if you wish. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 04:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi, there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button Image:Wikisigbutton.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot 19:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Even and odd numbers

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on Even and odd numbers. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from editing.. —David Eppstein 20:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

...and you're getting pretty close on perfect number, too. —David Eppstein 21:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I blocked you for 48 hours for revert warring at the above two articles. The next block may be longer. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 22:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
I have now blocked you for a further week for your edits at Perfect number. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 00:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Note

This is wrong. Z is an integral domain but not a division ring. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 19:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] December 2007

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Wieferich prime. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. . Yes, I realize, I'm also at three reverts, so I'm removing the disputed content from the article entirely. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:23, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I blocked you for edit warring. Come back in a week. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 06:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Brun's constant, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. —Animum (talk) 16:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I blocked you for two weeks for edit warring at Brun's constant and Perfect number. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 17:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] January 2008

I blocked you for revert warring at Parity (mathematics). Come back in two weeks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 07:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)