User talk:Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction

Hi Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! Jay8g [V•T•E] 06:19, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The text you removed is fundamentally correct, but woefully poorly sourced, and the maths are a mess.

You have significant knowledge on this topic. If you get time, a rework of the correct content from the removed section would be super helpful.

thanks for helping to keep the encyclopedia accurate, Augmented Seventh🎱 17:40, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I discovered the quantum machine learning article because I have been fixing reference errors (instances of {{cite book}} that should be {{cite journal}}, etc.) and one of its citations was flagged in Category:CS1_errors:_periodical_ignored. The page is a horrible mess overall. I don't know if people were actually using it to advertise their own preprints, but it sure read that way, along with random hype from press releases and so forth. The article quite possibly needs reworking from scratch, or nearly so, with a more principled sense of what is necessary to include. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 18:13, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

noted. Augmented Seventh🎱 19:18, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction,

I was just curious, you seem to be primarily editing articles that begin with the letter "Q". Is that intentional or just a really odd coincidence? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:17, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found my way accidentally to the category of CS1 errors mentioned above, and I got the idea that it would be fun to resolve all of them under the letter Q. It was the first letter I looked at where the number was small enough that the task looked do-able. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 20:59, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: And now they're all done except for the one that needs Extended Confirmed editing rights! Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 04:01, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction! The thread you created at the Teahouse, Help requested fixing citations at Jose Maria Quijano Wallis, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread. See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=KiranBOT}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). —KiranBOT (talk) 03:23, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

		The Excellent New Editor's Barnstar A new editor on the right path
		Although I am "conflicted" as I give out this accolade in the sense that I appreciate you agreeing with my arguments at two AfDs, I am still summarily impressed by your initial contributions generally. Welcome to Wikipdia and let me know if you need any help as you get going. jps (talk) 16:51, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 19:16, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Please have a look also at the information at this page, which appears every time you edit J. K. Rowling. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:04, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have jumped into AfD, with a great sense of humor (humour?), which is a great way to learn about our culture and processes. Your expertise is needed here. If you have any extra time, please help to source stubs at Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced articles/Backlog drives/June 2025. Bearian (talk) 15:34, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for calling that to my attention. I was working on citation errors; I will try browsing the unreferenced stubs as well. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 16:33, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Here's an example: Forward scattering alignment. Make sure you place the phrase "# JUN 25" without spaces or quote marks in your edit summary. Bearian (talk) 17:34, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Another one is Four-fermion interactions. Bearian (talk) 17:40, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And another is Gauged supergravity. Bearian (talk) 19:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hi I noticed that you merged the article on Ising critical exponents to Universality class. I though the summary of AfD is that one should not touch this article. Are you sure you interpreted this properly?

If you decide to merge, do you have an idea how to avoid the fact that now the numbers for Ising critical exponents appear in two tables? It would be good to avoid having to update both tables. Currently the second table contains updated numbers in 3D (and also the omega exponent), while the first big table contains outdated numbers in 3D and no omega exponent. PhysicsAboveAll (talk) 07:54, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was no affirmative consensus to merge, but there was no definitive consensus against doing so, either. (And when I mentioned doing this at WikiProject Physics, nobody complained.)

Maintaining one page (even if this means some changes apply in two places) is more convenient than maintaining two. And as I mentioned at the Talk page for the merged article, the first table could stand a refactoring anyway. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 14:40, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]