User talk:Zundark/archive2009

I found your old user page while checking out some old deleted contributions. I have history merged it, so that all edits are in one place. Hope you don't mind. Graham87 14:43, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Zundark (talk) 15:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for redirecting Scènes de Ballet (disambiguation) to Scènes de Ballet; could the former just be deleted? Nothing of significance links to it. — Robert Greer (talk) 19:43, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that current policy is to keep such redirects. See for example the discussion of "Dumb (disambiguation)". So trying to get it deleted would probably be a waste of time. --Zundark (talk) 21:59, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the page move of Morning Coffee (Firefox add-on). Wasn't paying attention was I? --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 22:57, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

when i made Leper Messiah (song) i was only a user for like a month. i didnt know u didnt need, "(song)" after the name unless there was another article with that name. but i found out like a week later. but im not sure how to fix it, like rename it. if u can do it, that would be really helpful. CallMeAndrew (talk) 22:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your link fix on September Hase! Much appreciated! Iheartrockers85 (talk) 13:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you post recently in the discussion section of PlanetMath under the name of "Ptrf"? Bci2 (talk).

No, of course not. I always post on Wikipedia under the name "Zundark". --Zundark (talk) 08:07, 22 May 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you for the reply. The posting by someone signing "Ptrf"--whose user talk I could not find on Wikipedia implied to have posted before and said he/she "was not anonymous"; his/her postings were meshed without any spacing or indentation with what now appears to be your posting. Because of this confusion, I appreciate your clearing up the status of the discussions made there. "ptrf" is however a PM registered user with only one entry.Nu 14:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Bci2, on May 22, 2009."Bci2 (talk).

Ptrf's user talk page is at User talk:Ptrf. I don't see the "meshing" you are talking about on Talk:PlanetMath, and the only confusion of attribution I see in that discussion is due to your bad indentation and missing or broken signatures. --Zundark (talk) 15:12, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Creative (song), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Creative (song). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 12:43, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing my move of sections in Talk:Exponentiation, I misread the diffs. Dmcq (talk) 18:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work with the Toto articles. Do you listen to their music?Foxhound66 (talk) 16:04, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I just came across the mess that someone had left and decided to fix it. --Zundark (talk) 17:01, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work with the charts. you beat me to it.Foxhound66 (talk) 12:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing my Lasers album article. I didn't realize I broke so many links when I made it just Lasers. Osh33m (talk) 13:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This file was moved to Commons from English Wikipedia, but some description information may have got lost in the process.

As you are noted as the original uploader, or in the history for the file, it would be appreciated if you could help in reconstructing this information.

Please also consider checking Commons for other media that you may have uploaded locally, but which was subsequently transferred.

Special:Log for uploads can help in this.

Thanks for you assistance and keep uploading 'free' media :)Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article said that all negative even integers are trivial zeroes. However, for those values, the zeta function is infinite, not equal to 0. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.28.53.84 (talk) 15:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, you are confusing the Riemann zeta function with the series that is used to define it. When the series converges, it gives the value of the Riemann zeta function. But when it diverges, it means nothing. Please reread the definition, and note the use of analytic continuation. --Zundark (talk) 16:05, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that I butted in at Talk:Compact space. Because your comment was small, and my comment seemed to take into account your comment (and there was an edit conflict), I thought that I should insert my comment in between the OP's and yours. I am sorry if this insertion seemed rude to you, because I did not intend it in that way. --PST 07:10, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for linking the paper from numdam. I tend to use MathSciNet to find online journals; do you have suggestions on how to find online copies of journal articles that MSN misses? I typically link papers 2 or 3 times per week, usually in batches of 5 to 10, and would like to keep the time required in the 30min per batch range. Thanks for the link and for any advice, JackSchmidt (talk) 00:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Google Scholar is sometimes useful for finding online copies of papers that MathSciNet misses. For example, some universities have online repositories of papers by their own researchers (e.g., Leiden University), and these are usually findable through Google Scholar (as are papers on Numdam). Another place to look (since it doesn't seem to be findable through MathSciNet or Google Scholar) is GDZ, which has various German publications (Mathematische Zeitschrift, Mathematische Annalen, Crelle's journal, etc.). --Zundark (talk) 12:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again. That looks quick and effective. JackSchmidt (talk) 13:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have been too busy in real life to reply before now.

In my Firefox settings the default monospace was 13pt. However, the default minimum font was "none" and <:tt> therefore resulted in a font of about 5pt. While I have changed the setting, it seems to me that all Firefox users will have the same problem, unless they have foreseen this issue. That is the point of my proposed change.

Would you agree that requiring readers to change browser settings, which they are unlikely to know about, for the sake of a few articles, is not user-friendly?

MoS says this about formatting:

Formatting issues such as font size, blank space and color are issues for the Wikipedia site-wide style sheet and should not be specified in articles except in special cases. If you absolutely must specify a font size, use a relative size like font-size: 80%, not an absolute size like font-size: 8pt. It is almost never a good idea to use other style changes, such as font family or color.

Typically, the use of custom font styles will:

• reduce consistency—the text will no longer look uniform;
• reduce usability—it will likely be impossible for people with custom stylesheets (for accessibility reasons, for example)
  to override it, and it might clash with a different skin as well as bother people with color blindness; and
• increase arguments—other Wikipedians may disagree aesthetically with the choice of style.

I think that expresses the issues well. Regards, Grant | Talk 07:14, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The browser shouldn't use the minimum font size for teletype (<tt>), it should use the monospace font size. So the behaviour you describe sounds like a bug. I can't reproduce it in Firefox 3.0.15. --Zundark (talk) 09:54, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just upgraded from Firefox 3.0.8 to 3.5.5 and the problem ceased, so maybe it was a bug restricted to older versions. I don't think the bug was related to monospace as that was always set to 13pt. Anyway, I guess there are now few users of the version/s at fault. Grant | Talk 00:53, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]