User talk:fgnievinski

Hi Fgnievinski, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. However, you should consider adding relevant wikiproject talk-page templates, stub-tags and categories to new articles that you create if you aren't already in the habit of doing so, since your articles will no longer be systematically checked by other editors (User:Evad37/rater and User:SD0001/StubSorter.js are useful scripts which can help). Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Mike (talk) 00:09, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia's rocketry-related articles. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Rocketry? We are a group of editors dedicated to improving the overall quality of Wikipedia's rocketry-related content. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. Please see our list of open tasks for ideas on where to get started. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 09:51, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nightenbelle was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

No evidence of notability.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Indian Society of Remote Sensing and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Indian Society of Remote Sensing, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Nightenbelle (talk) 22:41, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Fgnievinski! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Nightenbelle (talk) 22:41, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:StarOne satellites requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:37, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Real utopian sociology, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Domination.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:15, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Targeted killing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Killing.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:39, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article Tutor (education) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence this occupation/job/position is notable. Could redirect to tutoring.

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. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:20, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tutor (education) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tutor (education) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:49, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Geolocation (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:00, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Scalar quantities has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Srleffler (talk) 02:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People associated with the International Committee on Intellectual Cooperation has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Kj cheetham (talk) 10:50, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Freedom to choose. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 13#"Right to choose" redirects until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 07:01, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Video evidence is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Video evidence until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Magnolia677 (talk) 23:43, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

F, when you tag articles for merging, it would be good to at least follow the discussion link and state your reasoning to start the discussion. I'm removing stage merge tags from places with no discussion, like Damped wave. Start over if you want to make the case, which in this case I might agree with. Dicklyon (talk) 06:20, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

F, you put "*computation of the logarithm of the spectral amplitude (directly as a complex value or indirectly in terms of its absolute square, real part, or complex argument)". I don't understand. Sure nobody would use the logarithm of the real part of the complex spectral amplitude, would they? And what does "complex argument" mean here? The argument is the phase of the amplitude, right? That's already a logarithm (the imaginary part of the complex logarithm); not something you'd take a logarithm of. Maybe the "its" refers sometimes to the spectral amplitude, and sometimes to the logarithm? If I understood the intent, I could help fix it. Dicklyon (talk) 17:59, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Dicklyon:, the correspondence is as follows:

• directly as a complex value: complex cepstrum
• indirectly in terms of its absolute square: power spectrum
• ... real part: real cepstrum
• ... complex argument (redirect for argument of a complex number): phase cepstrum

The description of the last two seems sketchy in the article, but that's what was already there. fgnievinski (talk) 18:21, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And I think you're right about the phase cepstrum: it seems just the phase of the complex cepstrum, it doesn't follow the same definition as the other types of cepstrum. fgnievinski (talk) 18:43, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And the real cepstrum uses the log of the magnitude, not the log of the real part. I'm going to rv that edit, and we can try to clarify the intent. Dicklyon (talk) 06:30, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the text ("setting the phase of the spectrum to zero") contradicts the formula, F^-1{log|F{f(t)}|}. I thought the text was more fitting to the name (real), so I was inclined to correct the formula, replacing the magnitude for the real-part operator. But now I've checked a source and it seems the formula is correct, the text is incorrect, and the title is just misleading: y=real(ifft(log(abs(fft(x))))); [1]. fgnievinski (talk) 07:04, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've noticed that the merge proposal backlog in WP:WikiProject Astronomy lists several of your split proposals (Nutation, List of common misconceptions, Magnetosphere), two of which are more than three months old. The reason why your split proposals haven't received any response is because you have not started any discussion in the articles' respective talk pages. Splitting an article does not work by simply tagging a section; please see WP:SPLIT for additional information on splitting articles. Nrco0e (talk · contribs) 02:25, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the re-purposed drug section for COVID-19 should really have the controversy around the many different drugs that have been tried. In particular, ivermectin has a wealth of studies behind it suggesting that it does work and only a few studies behind it saying it does not work. There has been active suppression of information about this drug. I feel that all of that ought to be covered in Wikipedia which should remain agnostic as an overall body. I would like permission to add that information, in the context of the controversy. Alexis Lieberman, MD — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexis Lieberman MD (talk • contribs) 12:59, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi you posted a question on Help talk:User contributions which is talk about the content of that help page,

for specific help you are better off at the Wikipedia:Teahouse Lee∴V 11:54, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Random sampling. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 28#Random sample until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:06, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my bad, somehow managed to swap the history diff. Evgeny (talk) 17:42, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, my comment was about the sidebar, not the "Doppler". I still believe it's very wrong to call the effect just "Doppler". If you really wish, add a comment that sometimes it may be called like that. But this doesn't belong to the Intro. And a citation to an essentially internal document is not a proof. In the whole life I haven't seen it called like that. No need to give the Wiki readers mostly irrelevant info.Evgeny (talk) 18:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Canadian Cartographic Association is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canadian Cartographic Association until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Bearcat (talk) 17:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your undiscussed move of Chernobyl to Chernobyl (Ukraine). An editor of your experience should know that this move requires discussion. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lord Bolingbroke: please discuss at Talk:Chernobyl disaster#Redirect "Chernobyl" here?. thanks fgnievinski (talk) 19:53, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Earth, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page MSL.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Found this ref cleanup tag on Ensemble averaging (machine learning), which it looks like you put there in 2014. I don't see anything particularly inappropriate in the papers mentioned, and I don't see any explanation of what the problem was on the talk page. Is there some specific thing that you had a problem with, or should I remove it? jp×g 02:05, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JPxG: looks like the situation has improved since the original tagging, so I've removed the tag, thanks for checking. fgnievinski (talk) 02:36, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

…for all the effort in the earth mensuration articles. Strebe (talk) 17:45, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼fgnievinski (talk) 21:53, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Paris meridian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lapland.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Carl Friedrich Gauss

added a link pointing to Heliotrope

Zenith camera

added a link pointing to Survey

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Closure phase, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phase.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Simultaneity has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BD2412 T 04:45, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Simultaneous algebraic reconstruction technique, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anders Andersen.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Precipitation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Depth.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Areal velocity

added a link pointing to Rate of change

Numerical-value equation

added a link pointing to Displacement

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

American Congress on Surveying and Mapping

added a link pointing to Journal

Irene Fischer

added a link pointing to Last ice age

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:53, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ensemble average (disambiguation), a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Ensemble average (disambiguation) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Ensemble average (disambiguation) during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Widefox; talk 19:41, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article Field strength (theoretical physics) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

claims to be a synonym for a term on which we already have an article. Author appears to support deletion in a 2017 talk page comment. This subject is beyond me, but this contradicts the claim of synonymous so this is at best a WP:TNT case.

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. SpinningSpark 23:10, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chart datum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Depth.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect AM/FM. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 7#AM/FM until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. BD2412 T 01:17, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Percentile rank, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cumulative frequency.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Face (geometry), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tiling.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Approximate inequality is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Approximate inequality until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:37, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As you have reverted to a disambiguation page, I hope that you have at least the courtesy to fix all links to that disambiguation page. Have fun. The Banner talk 00:52, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged the dab as a bca. fgnievinski (talk) 00:53, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fgnievinski: Hi there, I tried to ping you in the edit summary of this edit, but in case it didn't work, it was about this amendment of mine of this edit of yours. The example of the guideline: Snakes are often venomous, but lizards only rarely (see Poison). Note the capitalisation of Poison. Cheers. - DVdm (talk) 18:39, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, when applying {{anli}} to Approximation#See also, I found that about a third didn't already have wp:short descriptions, so I had to edit the affected articles to supply. It may be wise to do a sanity check if you can. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 11:36, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Disambiguation page not required (WP:2DABS). The 2 topics have hatnotes to each other.

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) 14:19, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Space in life has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 22:36, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Drawing, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Line drawing.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Half-power beamwidth and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 6#Half-power beamwidth until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:32, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my proposal to speedily rename subcategories of Category:Enforced disappearances by country e.g. Category:Forced disappearances in Argentina to Category:Enforced disappearances in Argentina to align with the parent category per C2C. Hugo999 (talk) 04:15, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

<dl> <dt>123</dt> <dd>abc</dd>

Hello, Fgnievinski. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "International Celestial Reference System and Frame".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Line bundle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Line.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect National hydrographic office and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 29#National hydrographic office until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 22:11, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Term-defn has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. AdrianHObradors (talk) 17:58, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Optical path length, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Path integral.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please re-read WP:TECHNICAL, which is one of the key criteria for a good article. Euclidean distance is a concept studied in secondary school, so the bulk of the article and especially its lead needs to be understandable to that audience. Putting in technical content about metric spaces, early in the article, is a bad idea. The article focuses on distances between pairs of points, and not on spaces of distances, at least until the "Generalizations" section. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:45, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@David Eppstein: Agreed, that's why I had proposed to define the Euclidean distance in terms of Pythagora's law, which every student should know, and would also allow a concise non-circular definition of Euclidean space. Could you please comment also at Talk:Euclidean_space#Definition_in_the_lead. fgnievinski (talk) 19:49, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Defining distance in terms of the Pythagorean theorem is not a way to make things less technical. So I find it hard to understand what you mean by "agreed". Stop adding advanced concepts to material that must be readable by middle school students. You are making the articles less readable, making the encyclopedia worse, and making more work for others running around after you cleaning up the problems you are making.

The distance between two points is a concept clearly understandable to middle school students. A metric space, fulfilling abstract axioms, with infinitely many points and distances between them, is a much more advanced concept. It is like the difference between first-order and second-order logic. You are taking something for which a deliberate and painstaking effort has been made to cast in first-order terms, and throwing that effort away by jumping into the second-order version from the start. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've only added a synonym, sourced and well known, you're clearly overreacting. fgnievinski (talk) 20:52, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MathWorld is not actually a very good source. XOR'easter (talk) 21:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[