User talk:CSTAR
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hi CSTAR, in your article of Karhunen-Loève theorem, there are no historical facts at all. When was the theorem formulated? Is that true that motivation for it came from studying stock market as a stochastic process? (There is no historical data in Karhunen-Loève transform article either). Thanks, Alex -- talk 06:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC).
Hi CSTAR, are you an admin? If you are I'd like to request semi-protection for talk:Afshar experiment. --Michael C. Price talk 18:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
May I also request protection for physics? See physics/wip for reasons.--Michael C. Price talk 14:00, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Image:IMG 0073.JPG listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:IMG 0073.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 01:48, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:IMG 0053.JPG listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:IMG 0053.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you.
[edit] What if you threw an RfC and nobody came?
Any suggestions what to do about the V&C dispute on Cole? Nobody has responded to the RfC I posted, and nobody on the V&C page seems to have an opinion other than Armon and myself. It seems like a minor issue that should be easily resolved, but it has brought work on that page to a complete halt. Do you have an opinion on the matter? Is it nuts to think that third hand speculation is not encyclopedic?--csloat 00:26, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that it nuts, but there's a limit to the amount of lawyering I'm willing to engage in. Every sentence seems to require extensive discussions on policy.--CSTAR 01:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- That's the problem with an article being hijacked by editors who refuse to follow BLP but who have way more free time than the rest of us. Might as well just call the article "Armon's and Isarigs views of Coles Views and controversies" at this point.--csloat 10:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] group C*-algebras
- "It would be nice to have a better article on group C*-algebra that relates the dual of a LC group to that of its corresponding group C*-algebra,..."
This stuff is a bit technical, so I'll first have to track down a copy of Dixmier.
- "I would help out, but I'm becoming increasingly frustrated with WP."
You could adopt my solution: only edit articles too obscure for vandals/cranks/idiots to have heard of. R.e.b. 22:57, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, doesn't always work.--CSTAR 00:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Probability-based strategy AfD
Just a note to let you know that I have nominated the article you have edited, or expressed interest in, for deletion. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Probability-based strategy Pete.Hurd 05:32, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
