User talk:D.Lazard

Affine manifold (disambiguation)

Hello - I'm writing because you are an editor of Algebraic variety that might be able to help. Could you take a look at Affine manifold (disambiguation) please? It's a WP:2DABS page trying to disambiguate 2 subjects that look to me the same, but might not be! Are the 2 entries the same thing? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:21, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

To editor Shhhnotsoloud: The 2 subjects are not the same. I have changed the hatnote of Affine manifold for clarifying this (the new hatnote has more blue links than recommended by WP:HATEXTRA, but, in this case, this seems unavoidable). I have also nominated the dab page for speedy deletion (db-g6). D.Lazard (talk) 13:37, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. The dab page is not strictly eligible for CSD because that would need only one (or zero) entries, but sometimes it works. If speedy is declined I'll PROD it. Regards. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:55, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Affine manifold (disambiguation)

The article Affine manifold (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Disambiguation not required. Primary topic has necessary hatnote

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:57, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Division algorithm

I noticed you undid my edits on the article Division algorithm for improper publishing. I was hoping you could help me know how I should publish appropriately. Thanks. Warnerjon12 (talk) 16:58, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello Warnerjon12. Regarding your contribution here, please see WP:No original research. Wikipedia is not intended to be a venue for first publication of novel ideas. From a practical standpoint, your method is still far from proving its usefulness. When you claim cubic convergence, you do no analysis of how the algorithm will behave on typical floating-point hardware. Also, any new method would have to be implemented in code and the code would have to be tested. EdJohnston (talk) 17:13, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Okay, great. Warnerjon12 (talk) 22:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Edits by 114.205.211.151

This IP 114.205.211.151 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has/have (I don't know the number of users) made a number of edits to math articles. Some have been made to other articles, but the anon has returned to math articles. A number of them have been undone for various reasons. The IP adds unsourced, opinion, and/or rants to articles such as Yahoo! GeoCites and Algerian Arabic. I am unqualified to validate edits to math articles. Would you please take a look? Thanks Jim1138 (talk) 07:27, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

To editor Jim1138: I have looked to their math edits. They are not I'm my main area of competence, but the few ones that have not been reverted seem not really problematic. Can you be more specific on doubtful edits that have not been reverted? D.Lazard (talk) 09:03, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Given the anon's problematic edits on many non-math articles, I was rather concerned with the math-related articles. I was worried something had fallen through the gaps. Thank you for checking. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 10:53, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Joel Moses

Pls explain why you reverted my edit. I thought bullet format highlights his various roles better.--K81944 (talk) 17:34, 22 June 2017 (UTC)