User talk:BenKovitz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Summary

The criticizers of the Finno-Ugric and Uralic language groups say, that the languages of these "groups" are related. They are clearly related by agglutination and the features, that are common among the turanian (Sumerian) agglutinating languages. What the criticizers maintain is, however, that these artificial mini groups have very few words common, and no common grammar except of the Sumerian type of agglutination, and therefore it is unlogical and counterproductive to classify them into this artificial, in reality by nothing justified mini groups.

Thanks for your corrections. The summary must explain, what criticizers criticize, and what not. If you can correct it so, that this remains understandable, thanks in advance. Antifinnugor 11:51, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Also: criticizers criticize both finno-ugrian and uralic groups, since they are in fact the same thing. Antifinnugor 11:57, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Tiny role?

Ben, didn't you introduce Sanger to wiki technology? That's not quite a tiny role. Adraeus 01:57, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ha! Thanks, Adraeus. I still haven't even made 100 edits, though... Ben Kovitz 20:37, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Kovitz

Hello Ben. I have listed Ben Kovitz on Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion because it is a redirect from the main article space to the user space. I thought it would be courteous of me to let you know. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 16:37, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Taco Deposit. I didn't find Ben Kovitz listed on Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion, but I think it's fine to delete it. Ben Kovitz 20:36, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pete stops by

Yo Ben. Was looking you up to see if you had a doctorate yet so I can call you Dr Kovitz in applying to become director of development at health department - long not very sensible story. Since you owe me email and I owe you presents I thought I'd go snoop you out in wikidom but was surprised to find greenlight giving errors instead of pages so thought you might be dead. Now finding recent edits here I see you are either not dead or being imitated by someone remarkably adept at imitating you. Anyway fwiw how's it all? --Pete.

[edit] Liminality

Hi there, Evilphoenix. Thanks for fixing up the Liminality article! That was my first attempt at starting a Wikipedia page. How did you find it so fast?

Ben

NewPages. I do New page patrol. EvilPhoenix talk 02:55, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Definition of math

The definition you are trying to push is not NPOV. It is also not a definition. It is just a list of things mathematician are interested in. The definition coming from a suggestion by Rick Norwood is much better. It is not too highly philosophical and it is not exclusive since your definition is there too. In the head you need a definition which can be understood by any educated reader. Not a list of things nobody can understand. The study of quantity! What the hell is this? The quantity of what? Such a definition make flee any goodwilling reader. Oh shit a math thing again! Vb 131.220.68.177 14:47, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

We might actually be in very deep agreement here, Vb. See my comments on the talk page. —Ben Kovitz 15:45, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Deductive reasoning

Thanks for the feedback. Considering how many people had been editing it, getting several kinds of deductive processing all mixed up, I was very concerned about how some of them would react, so your remarks are greatly appreciated. Wryspy 21:35, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Heuristic

I'm glad you liked it. I often get worried about trodding on the toes of folks who've gone before. It's gratifying if I hear that I haven't messed it up. Thanks. I just happened to have always had an interest the subject, with most of the references in my library, from Polya to Gigerenzer. DCDuring 01:16, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Snack-liking

I like snacks. Snacky (talk) 05:02, 26 February 2008 (UTC)