User talk:Davilla

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Davilla, 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:

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:Where to ask a question, 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! , SqueakBox 22:11, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] "Move to Wikitravel"

I have speedy-deleted Template:Move to Wikitravel. It previously existed, but was deleted due to the fact that Wikitravel's license is incompatible with Wikipedia's. Thus, nothing can be moved to Wikitravel legally (unless it is dual-licensed by the author). -- Cyrius|✎ 22:28, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I also deleted the category, as it went away for the same reason. -- Cyrius|✎ 22:40, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] sorry if I seemed harsh

Sorry if I seemed dismissive over your concerns about the Authentic Matthew VfD. I agree that this article should be deleted, and I think the VfD is open to differing interpretations. But, the closing admin took the view that the 70% threshhold for delete votes had not been met. I think that decision was over-cautious, but not unreasonable. As you may have noted -Ril- contested it and put it back up for VfD - a move that was always unlikely to succees and really p'd off the admins. I simply think that the best tactics here are to accept the VfD (as regrettable as the decission was) and to seek other ways of cleaning up this dreadful article. A protected redirect seems almost as good as deletion.

Stay with it - you'll pick up the WP rules, I'm still learning, (some of them are pretty bizzare) as you go along. --Doc (?) 13:07, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Not a problem. I might have mis-assessed my goals in all the action, but I'm actually more interested in the rules than in anything else here. -davilla (Sorry I haven't been able to log in.) 59.112.41.190 14:50, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Authentic Matthew the sequel

The POV that was in Authentic Matthew before it was NPOVed has been re-created at a new article - see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/The Original Gospel of Matthew. ~~~~ ( ! | ? | * ) 20:12, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Big O notation

Here is the reference for the big O notation. It is assumed as standard notation in many branches of advanced maths, so it is not really appropriate to give a reference every time it is used. Hope this helps! Madmath789 18:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

It's one thing to say it doesn't need a reference every time and another to remove a brief explanation, and the only one on the page, as a "nonsense statement". Or perhaps there was a problem with my wording? Davilla 07:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, it was the wording that was the problem. The statement "where O(k) is on order k" unfortunately does not make sense in English. If you wish to add a brief explanation on the page about big O notation, I don't think that would be [a] problem. Madmath789 07:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)