User talk:Thomasmeeks
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, Thomasmeeks, 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:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
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:Questions, 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! RJFJR 03:19, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Social Choice and Individual Values
I screen the WP collection of articles once in a while so I wounded up reading your article.
It lacks in :
- sectionning
- inline citations
- NPOVness, it has point-of-vue orientation (though I don't know the subject very well)
- as you say, linking to other articles to let other people give feedback
- that there is no lead section appropriate to what encyclopaedic search for
See Krazy Kat or The Illuminatus! Trilogy for template-like articles that can help with improving the article.
Other than that, your prose is really good and the text flows when I read it. Best of luck. Lincher 15:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- It looks good to me, but its still missing inline citations (as in referencing the books that were used for the article). For more info you should ask a Peer review or go into Good article phase in order to get more in depth advices. Lincher 15:01, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- I cannot give you more info on your article, to me it seems well written and referenced though some other fellas might find it needs more and a Good article nomination can help you with that. Lincher 23:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I removed the cleanup tag for you, you could have done it. As for the spoiler, it can stay there, since it tells people that they might find info from the book on the article. Lincher 01:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Social Choice and Individual Values
((help me)) 1. This is the title of a new WP article I wrote. How can I make GO connect to it if I use only lower case for the GO window?
2. I'd like to get review comments as to clarity and content on it before I put links in other articles. Should I just go to the Talk page of related articles and solicit comments on the Discussion Talk page for Social Choice and Individual Values? (It's about a book by the economic theorist Kenneth Arrow.)
Thx. Thomasmeeks 23:23, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- A redirect should do the trick. I already created one for you, but for more info check out Help:Redirect.
- Posting on talk pages sounds like a great way to get more feedback. I would also suggest Wikipedia:WikiProject Books as another good place to ask for feedback and see more details about this type of article. --Hetar 23:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your message
Thanks for the message on my talk page. I'm not sure where I saw Social Choice and Individual Values... did you post about it on the Help Desk? It's on my watchlist and I often answer (and ask!) questions there. MCB 05:02, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] IIA
Thanks for the link to the online 1951 article. I had no idea it was online.
I'm not going to change anything substantial you did, since as the Ray article points out there are differences between some versions of IIA. (This depends on the type of IIA as well as the logical framework -- just because they're stated differently doesn't mean they're distinct, of course.) I did add a clarifier* that the two concepts are related because I feel this is important: everyone thought that the two concepts were the same for many years, and the intent was to get at the same concept in different ways. Frankly I see the need for a new article expanding on Ray's, discussing the ways to unify all the different types of IIA conceptually under one theoretical framework, making their differences clearer. Further, such a work could clarify what types of IIA are actually used in various proofs invoking them: I would not be surprised to see one type assumed and another used in the proof in some cases.
Regardless, best of luck to you in editing the article -- it could use some work, I think.
- Actually my clarifier was poorly worded. When I think of something better I'll edit it; otherwise feel free to do the same.
CRGreathouse (t | c) 23:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] test
test Thomasmeeks 20:40, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Help request for logging in Dear RJFJR: You were my greeter on April 22 when I was a Wiki newbie. What a difference a few months make. I have since created a couple of articles near the top of Google searches for that subject (perhaps more usual than not, I admit) and edited many more articles.
Yesterday something odd happened. When I prepared to Save the edit, Wiki said that I was not logged in. I tried to log in using my User name and password. The message was that I had successfully logged in, but the top line far righthand side of my Wiki portal indicated otherwise: log out. I tried getting a new password, which was received within seconds via email. It made no difference. Same thing today. I conclude that I am blocked from fully logging on. The "fully" refers to that my Wiki portal says "log out". (I have received no communications recently on my discussion page.) Is there anything that can be done to fix this? Or can you refer me to someone for assistance? My thanks.
One other detail and possible explanation: When I originally registered, Wiki responded by email, noting my IP address. With the change in passwords on July 22 and again yesterday Aug. 3, the Wiki email response noted that I had an IP address different from mine. It's where my User name (Thomasmeeks) should be in the present message. I had assumed that the discrepancy was a Wiki assignment. But I'm wondering if the discrepancy might be responsible for blocking my fully logging on. 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Odd, you have signed this with an IP address indicating you are not logged on, but the message "log out" at the upper right hand corner is where you click to log out and should only be shown if you ARE logged in. (Note that it says "log out" not "logged out"). If it lists your user name the the top right hand section then it knows who you are and you are logged in. You may get more information at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). RJFJR 20:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC) I see. I have lapsed into Sign in status yesterday & today in edit efforts after attempting to log in, possibly an unrelated problem that I conflated with log-in status. Thx for your help & reference. At least my User name is back. Thomasmeeks 21:35, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Any way to remove underscoring of within-article hypertext?
The argument for underscoring is, I suppose, that newbies will more quickly figure that the hypertext is a link. As reader, however, I underscoring an unnecessary distraction. Thx. Thomasmeeks 15:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Either go to your perferences and click on the "misc" tab, then select "never" for the underlining links part. Or you can put this in your monobook.css:
a { text-decoration: none; }
If you don't want to bother with links at all, use:
/* IE-able */
a, a.new {color: black; text-decoration: none;}
/* NON IE */
a, a.new {color: inherit; text-decoration: none;}
GeorgeMoney (talk) 15:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC) Thx. Done. BW, Thomasmeeks 16:53, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] table example
In compatible browsers, an edit toolbar can be automatically displayed with the edit box, provided that this has been set in the preferences.It appears automatically for editors who are not logged in. This functions partly as a typing aid and partly as a reminder of the available functions. All the functions are available simply by typing the code directly into the edit box (such as [[link]]) - this may be easier.
The toolbar works with Internet Explorer, the Mozilla Suite/SeaMonkey, Firefox, Konqueror, Safari and Opera.
For example:
To turn a piece of text into an internal link, select it and press the third button.
In Mozilla browsers and IE, you can format existing text by highlighting the text you want to format and clicking the relevant button on the toolbar. If you click a button without selecting any text, sample text will be inserted at the cursor's position (like so: Bold text). In other browsers, clicking on the button presents an explanation for that feature. (Pre-release 9.0 versions of Opera browser also seem to support the advanced functionality.)
All of the toolbar options, and further editing options, are available in Bananeweizen's Firefox extension.
[edit] List of functions
(apart from the last two examples, these pieces of wikitext are created by typing abc, selecting it and clicking the buttons on the toolbar)
| Icon | Function | What it shows when editing | What it shows on the page |
|---|---|---|---|
 |
Bold or strong emphasis | '''abc''' | abc |
 |
Italic or emphasis | ''abc'' | abc |
 |
Internal link | [[abc]] | abc |
 |
External link | [abc.com] | |
 |
Section heading | == abc == |
[edit] abc |
 |
Insert image | [[Image:abc.jpg]] |  |
 |
Insert media | [[Media:abc.ogg]] | Media:abc.ogg |
 |
Mathematical formula | <math>abc</math> | abc |
 |
Ignore wiki formatting | <nowiki>abc '''[[Bold text]]'''</nowiki> | abc '''[[Bold text]]''' |
 |
Sign talk comments (with time stamp) | --~~~~ | --Gareth Aus 22:49, 11 February 2006 (UTC) |
 |
Horizontal line | ---- |
|
New on the English Wikipedia: create redirect page. Template:H:f User
[edit] example of table
[edit] August Esperanza Newsletter
|
|
|
[edit] Book of Daniel
This article achieved its current layout through the efforts of a large number of editors cooperating, so the talk page of that article should be used to discuss changes or improvements to that layout, since more editors who took part will have that on their list and can join the discussion, without being left out. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 14:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
- Again, the talk page of this article should be used to discuss the changes so that more editors can take part. Also, I am one of those in the 6th century BC school myself... The reason the sentence was added that you are trying to move, is precisely because it has direct bearing on the reason many people think there is an early date. It is not the only argument but one of the main ones that is used for 6th century authorship (This point has already been discussed at length on the talk page, so moving the sentence without joining in there seemed a little pre-emptive...) ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 20:49, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] John P. Meier
I answered your question on my talk page with some page numbers, then went back and corrected them; sorry if you picked up the first (incorrect) edit. If you have a copy of AMJ handy you might select some quotations (I did my checking at the bookstore); otherwise, I'll add them when I'm next at the main library. Cheers, Michael K. Edwards 00:18, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Meier and miracles
I have been watching with interest your expansion of John P. Meier. I thought I'd call this quote to your attention, from page 482 of the Biblica 1999 citation: "Not only the global argument but also the probing of all the individual miracle stories and sayings point to a historical Jesus who claimed and was believed by his disciples to have worked miracles during his public ministry." This seems to get the balance of emphasis right, and might be worth using in a summary of this aspect of Meier's work (which he seems to regard as fairly central to his personal contribution to the wider dialogue).
Keep up the good work! Cheers, Michael K. Edwards 23:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] criterion of multiple attestation
I created a new article. I would appreciate your imput and review of it. My biggest concern is that the introduction basically consists of a long quote from Meier. While it is always good to make sure we have the authors views corectly, it seems unencyclopedic to start an article off that way. This problem exists in the criterion of embarrassment article as well. Anyway, tell me what you think.--Andrew c 18:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
- I'm going to move this discussion to talk:criterion of multiple attestation, if you don't mind.--Andrew c 22:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Public Choice Theory
Great work on the PCT article. Feel free to remove the cleanup banner when you feel comfortable with it. You've satisfied my reasons for adding it. Morphh 13:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well, that's pretty authoritative. Thx, Morphh. You were right to post the banner, and I wouldn't have been emboldened to act without it. I may do a bit more on the article, but I'll return the honor of retiring the banner to you.
- I think that the substance is there, but the article could still use some concision. Wish that there were a banner for that. Maybe there should be. Or I could at least post this on the PCT Talk page. BW, Thomasmeeks 11:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Derivative
Hi. I don't understand this edit. Not at all really, and not for lack of mathematics education. Would you please visit talk:Derivative and explain what you mean? Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Never mind, I think I got it now. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:03, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- Sorry. I have been kind of grumpy and inconsiderate. I don't own the derivative article, so please feel free to edit it. I won't interfere with your changes anymore. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 16:03, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Derivative again
Hello. I am not familiar with your use of "represent" as it applies to the derivative. You say "social science apps often use derivative + or - sign to 'represent' empirical-theory relation". I'm not familiar with this use - can you provide a reference to an example of such use? Also, I'm not sure this applies in the sentence in the article: is this use the representation of a property of a function? Also, I removed the wikidictionary link since it didn't point to any specific definition, and I don't think pointing to a definition of "represent" would really help the reader understand this use. Thanks, Doctormatt 18:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Misc.
-
-
- May I respectfully suggest that you review this thread and talk page guidelines. I was not aware that deleting a Wiki template that I thought no longer applied (and for which I gave a reason) is suppression of a viewpoint. Thomasmeeks 19:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
-
In statistics, regression analysis examines the dependence of a random variable, called a dependent variable (response variable, regressor), on other random or deterministic variables, called independent variables (predictors). The mathematical model of their relationship is the regression equation. Well-known types of regression equations are linear regression, the logistic regression for discrete responses (both generalize in the generalized linear model), and nonlinear regression.
In statistics, regression analysis examines the relation of a dependent random variable ((the response variable) to specified independent variables (predictors). The mathematical model of their relationship is the regression equation. Well-known types of regression equations are linear regression and nonlinear regression. Linear regression ranges from ordinary least squares to the generalized linear model, which includes logistic regression for discrete responses.
[edit] Misc.
The social ranking of one pair of distinct social states, say x and y, is different for 2 sets of orderings, say R1, ..., Rn and R1', ..., Rn' with corresponding social orderings R and R' , such that x R y and y R' x.
In economics, wealth refers to assets minus liabilities, whether narrowly or broadly construed.
[edit] Your Request Images
Your requested images are finnally ready: Image:Maximum_tangentplane_boxed.png and Image:Maximum_boxed.png according to your instructions. --Freiddy 17:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Smith's definition
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Regarding the Economics article, I strongly feel that the lenghty quote from Smith (1776) does not belong in the introduction. It is of mainly historical interest and disrupts the reader. Much better to put it in a section that specifically deals with the history of economic thought or alternative definitions of Economics. Regards, Ujalm 20:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC).
- I appreciate your comment, Ujalm, and the way you expressed it. I meant what I said in commending your Edit (in the my Edit summary, which I hope you read closely). It was a careful and well-considered Edit. Let me be very frank. Before today the Smith quote was a bit of a snoozer for me too. At the very time you made your Edit, however, I was trying to fix things with a new sentence preceding the quotation. Had you (instead of me) have put that new sentence in, I think my reaction before today would have been (after studying the quotation again): "Smith, you clever dog, you're one of us, just waiting to be rediscovered." From my perspective (today) I believe that the Smith quotation is of more than historical interest in showing the continuity of the economic perspective. If you disagree after perusing this (and possibly Smith), please let me know, either here or on the Econ Talk page. BW & regards, Thomasmeeks 21:37, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Economics is not only a social science but a science, so its practitioners claim.[1] For representing and the testing the theory, it may use mathematical economics and econometrics. Thomasmeeks 02:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
putnam "fact/value dichotomy" http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/PUTCOL.html
[edit] Economic language and reasoning
May 1 2004 Economics relies on rigorous styles of argument. Economic methodology has several interacting parts:
- Collection of economic data. These data consist of measurable values of price and changes in price, for measurable commodities. For example: the cost to hire a worker for a week, or the cost of a particular commodity, and how much is typically used.
- Formulation of models of economic relationships, for example, the relationship between the general level of prices and the general level of employment. This includes observable forms of economic activity, such as money, consumption, preferences, buying, selling, and prices. Some of the models are simple accounting models, while others postulate specific kinds of economic behaviour, such as utility or profit maximization. An example of a model that illustrates both of these aspects is the classical mathematical formulation of the Keynesian system involving the consumption function and the national income identity. This article will refer to such models as formal models, although they are not formal in the sense of formal logic. Economists often formulate very simple models in order to define the impact of just one variant changing. This is called the "ceteris paribus"-assumption (All others equal), meaning that all other things are assumed not to change during the period of observation. Example: "If the price of movie tickets rises, ceteris paribus the demand for popcorn falls."
- Production of economic statistics. Taking the data collected, and applying the model being used to produce a representation of economic activity. For example, the "general price level" is a theoretical idea common to macroeconomic models. The specific inflation rate involves taking measurable prices, and a model of how people consume, and calculating what the "general price level" is from the data within the model. For example, suppose that diesel fuel costs 1 euro a litre: To calculate the price level would require a model of how much diesel an average person uses, and what fraction of their income is devoted to this —but it also requires having a model of how people use diesel, and what other goods they might substitute for it.
- Reasoning within economic models. This process of reasoning (see the articles on informal logic, logical argument, fallacy) sometimes involves advanced mathematics. For instance, an established (though possibly unexamined) tradition among economists is to reason about economic variables in two-dimensional graphs in which curves representing relations between the axis variables are parameterized by various indices. A good example of this type of reasoning is exhibited by Paul Krugman's online essay, There's something about macro.[2] See also the article IS/LM model. One critical analysis of economic reasoning is studied in Paul Samuelson's treatise, Foundations of Economic Analysis: he identifies a class of assertions called operationally meaningful theorems which are those that can be conceivably refuted by empirical data.[3] As usual in science, the conclusions obtained by reasoning have a predictive as well as confirmative (or dismissive) value. An example of the predictive value of economic theory is a prediction as to the effect of current deficits on interest rates 10 years into the future. An example of the confirmative value of economic theory would be confirmation (or dismissal) of theories concerning the relation between marginal tax rates and the deficit.
Formal modelling, which has been adapted to some extent by all branches of economics, is motivated by general principles of consistency and completeness. It is not identical to what is often referred to as mathematical economics; this includes, but is not limited to, an attempt to set microeconomics, in particular general equilibrium, on solid mathematical foundations. Some reject mathematical economics: The Austrian School of economics believes that anything beyond simple logic is often unnecessary and inappropriate for economic analysis. In fact, the entire empirical-deductive framework sketched in this section may be rejected outright by that school. However, the framework sketched here accurately represents the current predominant view of economics.
[edit] Notes
- ^ Lazear, Edward. "Economic Imperialism". The Quarterly Journal of Economics. Retrieved on 2007-01-22.
- ^ There's Something About Macro by Paul Krugman - a brief introduction to macroeconomics.
- ^ Paul Samuelson, Foundations of Economic Analysis, p.4).
The estimated parameters measure the size of relationship between the response variable and each of the respective predictors. The 'prediction' of a regression equation is in the sense of causal-like association, rather than a forecast, in that values of the response variable used in the parameter estimates are already known.
[edit] 3RR warning on Book of Daniel
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 14:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- Dear Codex Sinaiticus, I can use all the help I'm offered. I was relieved to see that the history of the article shows me with the same number of reverts as you today (that is, 3). But your point, which I was aware of, is well taken. I would never intentionally violate the 3RR rule. Thank you for your taking the trouble to write. --Thomasmeeks 16:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Linear Regression
Permission granted in favour of the support for the given lead. Woollymammoth 20:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] ... my very first spat at the Wikipedia ~
~ ... just getting my feet wet, here. Sorry for stepping on toes. By all means, hate mail and death threats are never turned away, in my mailbox. I totally understand your frustration. It's important to vent. Get it out of your system.
~ I'll go back, and make everything nice. Okay?
Acknowledged,
A. Samuel Joseph III, Geospatial Econometric Analyst 07:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[edit] Link to the data page
Dear Thomasmeeks, I do not think that the place of the external link you added to Regression was well chosen. Regression is not only about Americal econometric data, to say it sharply, and external links should not be placed in the body of the text. See WP:LINKS. I suggest you to add it to the article about data sets and/or Economerty, in the section External links. Greetings,--Ioannes Pragensis 19:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
- Dear Ioannes Pragensis:
- Thank you for your comments. For ease of reference, let me meke the following points.
- 1. The relevant guideline in WP:LINKS is the first substantive sentence of the link:
- Adding external links to the text of the article can be a service to our readers, but they should be kept to a minimum of those that are meritable, accessible and appropriate to the article.
- Is it of service to our hypothetical reader? I believe so. To quote from, well, my Edit summary, it "answers the question that one hopes the innocent lay reader might ask as to 'data' at the end of the 2nd paragraph: 'Such as from where?'."
- 2. The relevant lead guidelines are for establishing context and providing an accessible overview, which I believe the footnote does, with or without the link.
- 3. The link in question was the top-ranked "data sources" hit. It includes American economic data to be sure, but msny other kinds of data (including data for agriculture, crime, demography, education, health, voting, and transportation, other data sites, links to other lists of data, etc.) from around the world in every instance (even including the U.S. Statistical Abstract, which has comparative international statistics at the end), statistical abstracts ro other conntries, etc. The link is also very inviting to look at.
- 4. North America is of course the largest audience for English Wiki. I can't see what the problem is for American data, especially when there are so many sources from elsewhere. By the way, the link in questiom is at a Canadian university.
- 1. The relevant guideline in WP:LINKS is the first substantive sentence of the link:
- Comments are welcome. --Thomasmeeks 15:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC) (Next to last line corrected.) --Thomasmeeks 13:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Hi Thomasmeeks,
1. Read please WP:LINKS to the end - under "External links section" it states that the best place for external links is the External links section at the end. Otherwise you "should give your reader a good summary of the site's contents, and the reasons why this specific website is relevant to the article in question" - which is impossible here, because the website is relevant only very loosely if at all.
2. Either the footnote is important, and then it can be in the main text after a re-formulation, or it is unimportant and should be dropped from the lead. I've never seen footnotes like this in good WP leads. We should keep the style of the whole work.
3. and 4. May be it is true that the USA is the most important audience, but the content should be unbiased (read WP:BIAS). The link is from a university, but it is not officially supported by the university. The server does not matter, important is the authority. Moreover the list has not only cultural bias but also a "discipline bias": regression is widely used also outside of economy (e.g. physics, biology, medicine etc.).
Have a nice day,--Ioannes Pragensis 10:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Derivative once more
I guess you might have had mixed experiences with Derivative, but I think you made valuable contributions and left helpful comments. I have just completed a rewrite of the article. One of the goals was to make the initial parts of the article more elementary and accessible (although it now becomes a bit more advanced later on). I would very much value your comments. Geometry guy 21:13, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Reginald H. Fuller
You wrote most of this article, so I thought you'd want to know. Dr. Fuller died this evening, 4 April 2007. He was my grandfather.
