User talk:MarSch

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives
/Archive 1

[edit] Renaming user language categories?

I found a comment you made a while back in Wikipedia talk:Babel/Archive1#Category: User languages -> Wikipedians by languages ??, expressing support for the idea of renaming user language categories like Category:User en to Category:Wikipedians who speak English or the like. I've just submitted a CfR to do so at Wikipedia:User categories for discussion#Category:User en, so please feel free to weigh in if you feel moved to do so. :-) Tim Pierce 04:04, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GLT article speedied

Hello, just letting you know that the article about the GLT OpenGL library, GLT (programming), was flagged for speedy deletion, after moving the text from GLT, which was turned into a disambiguation page. -- intgr 11:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

You left this on my talk page: "I assume you were the one who flagged GLT for speedy deletion."

The answer is no, I just moved the content off the disambiguation page (article "GLT") to "GLT (programming)", and it was flagged for speedy after that by someone else; I don't know who initially tagged it. Ideally, admins should keep an eye on what actually qualifies for speedy deletion and what doesn't, so if you think this was an error, I suppose you should contact User:Steel359 instead. -- intgr 15:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] create an account

Please create an account. Talking with IP numbers if not very nice. --MarSch 15:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I already have an account, I just don't use it very often. But really, what's wrong with an IP address? After all, it's not like it's a dynamic IP. 80.233.255.7 16:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Well why don't you use your account then? What's wrong with names? --MarSch 16:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with names. It's just that it's either one more password to type in every day or one more permanent cookie on my PC, both equally undesirable. :) 80.233.255.7 17:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

free software is also open source, thank youMicropolygon 12:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Linux

Hi, MarSch. I think that a little more work on Linux would bring it to Featured Article status. I would be grateful for your opinion here. Thanks. Axl 12:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Provide explanation for removal of text from Paul Graham wiki page

Please provide an explanation for why you removed from Paul Graham, "A list of his essays is the first Google English language search result for the query "essays," as of March 4, 2007." I thought this statement was a good way of showing that he was notable as an essayist. - Connelly 05:28, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

for the talk page maybe. I don't think it is the kind of info that should be in an article. --MarSch 11:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll try and make the point that he's a notable essayist some other way, perhaps by quoting a source. - Connelly 19:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BeerTender

A tag has been placed on BeerTender, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. RJASE1 ^Talk 16:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi RJASE,

I don't think that page is blatant advertizing. It is just about a product. You may want to compare PerfectDraft and Senseo. I do think it would be good if BeerTender and PerfectDraft were merged, maybe into beer tapping system. --MarSch 17:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please be responsible when deleting huge swaths of text

Actually merge this into Linux distribution.
Consider creating a Linux desktop sub-article for this.
Don't delete mention of proprietary software because it's "incoherent".

In general, please tie up loose ends. 70.53.40.232 17:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Those first two are valid suggestions and you are free to implement them. I don't necessarily agree that they should be done though. Incoherent text has no place in an article of this length. --MarSch 17:43, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I know I can fix them. I'm asking *you* to try and make less destructive edits. 70.53.40.232 17:51, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Mathematics featured articles

I found this template when making a list of all math-related templates. You created it in 2005 and it has not been edited since 2005. Nothing seems to link to it or transclude it except your user page. Would you mind if it was deleted? CMummert · talk 13:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

no, please go ahead. --MarSch 09:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] C++

Your changes to C++ were reverted. As the article discusses C++-the-standard-language rather than C++-as-implemented-by-gcc, the ostream include is mandatory. Please do not remove this just because it works in your particular compiler. --Yamla 14:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wonphi account

Hi this is the former wonphi here, and I found out that you had talked to me about some butter fly kick issue. I will be glad to stop deleting the improper pictures, and replace them with my own.

However, may I gain permission to have access to my "wonphi" account again. Thanks and reply fast.

Hi Won(g)phi,

I do not have the powers to block or unblock anyone. Are you sure you got blocked though? Your actions do not warrant it and I couldn't find anything in the block log. --MarSch 09:36, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi wonphi here. Well I had no idea you could not block people, but when I type in my password, it says

"Incorrect password entered. Please try again.", but I am 100% sure my password is right.

Whats going on?

I don't know. Try having a new password mailed to you. --MarSch 07:28, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Well it says that I have no email written in order for it to mail to me? Has this ever happened to anyone before?

I'm not sure it is possible to recover your old account in this case. Unfortunately I can't seem to find any conclusive documentation on this. --MarSch 10:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Continuing from the main page

I found an even better direction. See Wikipedia:Administrators noticeboard#HD-DVD decryption key. The key has been added to the spam blacklist so whenever anyone adds it to any page, it isn't allowed to save. The key has been removed from the history of the HD DVD article by WJBscribe. Hope it helps. James086^{Talk | Email} 14:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your user page

I've removed the HD-DVD key from your user page per Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#HD_DVD.23Muslix64.27s_exploit and Wikipedia:User page. Please note that we are awaiting clarification from the Wikimedia Foundation's legal counsel over the legality of permitting you to have such content on your userpage. In the meantime, please do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Thanks. -- Netsnipe ► 16:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

It is you who should not disrupt my user page by deleting parts of the history and whomever by discontinuing wikipedia's policy of not censoring content. Please don't be (a vigilante)/(judge, jury and executioner) of your own doubt-inclusive fear-enhanced DMCA/EUCD. Don't be part of the problem. Please restore my user page.

May we enjoy freedom in another lifetime. Thank you --MarSch 17:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop pretending this is a free speech issue. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and content that does not further the goals of the encyclopedia may be removed if there is reason to do so. Friday (talk) 18:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

No. It is exactly a free speech issue. How shall we discuss whether this number or any other numbers which got collateral-censored is appropriate content for some article. How about uses unrelated to HD-DVD? This may be a small thing yet, but it is a slippery slope and I object to going there. --MarSch 18:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is private property. You are free to exercise your free speech on your website. Friday (talk) 18:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know free speech was reserved for when you are on your own property. --MarSch 18:26, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

You could put a sign in your own yard, for example, and claim free speech. If you go putting the sign in your neighbor's yard, you don't have much of a leg to stand on anymore. Please desist. Wikipedia is not your personal website. Friday (talk) 18:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Have you ever read any analysis on freedom of speech. You really need to educate yourself before trying to crusade for something you do not understand. Read any original text on free speech and they all have in common that you are free to speak anything IN PUBLIC. Wikipedia is not public, it may be a free encyclopedia but it still creates its own rules and own rights. Free speech is never guaranteed in any private place anywhere in the world unless the very owners of the private property decide it is. 128.227.13.27 22:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

My brain is working fine thank you very much. Truth is not reserved for things written down. I'm not interested in discussing whether Wikipedia is public or private or whether free speech is guaranteed anywhere in the world. All I'm interested in is making you think about setting a precedent for censorship within wikipedia, where it is policy not to censor anything and how you feel about being a tool in enforcing oppressive laws beyond their letter. --MarSch 11:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Censorship is a loaded word. We can't do censorship in the sense of suppressing opinions we don't like- this is what neutral point of view is about. We must do censorship in the sense of exercising editorial control and making sure our content is relevant and appropriate- this is what being an encyclopedia is about. As for the oppressive laws- I don't know, I have no opinion. I'm not interested. For our purposes here, we may describe the controversy, but we don't try to get involved in the controversy. See the big difference? Friday (talk) 13:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Good points. However I think we have gotten more involved by stating that there is an issue and acting on that with automatic measures and admin action. If you don't want to participate in controversy then don't act controversially. Don't edit other people's comments on talk pages, even if they say something like: 'I think we should include that radio frequency 1111Hz can be used to unlock Mercedes.'. --MarSch 09:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Could you point out to me what part of anything in WP:CENSOR applies? I see no pornography or cursing being added. 128.227.34.72 23:35, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

from WP:NOT#CENSOR: "Anyone reading Wikipedia can edit an article and the changes are displayed instantaneously without any checking to ensure appropriateness". Unfortunately automatic checking and admin actions were widespread.

from Censorship: "Censorship is the removal or withholding of information from the public by a controlling group or body. Typically censorship is done by governments, religious groups, or the mass media, although other forms of censorship exist.".

I fail to see how pornography and profanity#Common_examples_of_profanity are relevant to this discussion, unless you think they are censored, which I don't think is the case. --MarSch 09:06, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

You conveniently erased the end of that sentence "...so Wikipedia cannot guarantee that articles or images are tasteful to all users or adhere to specific social or religious norms or requirements." Furthermore, an article is not policy and the policy does not mention anything other than saying that you can expect nude pictures in certain articles and that cursing is allowed when deemed encyclopedically important. I find it insulting that you used such a base tactic as removing the end of a sentence which clearly qualifies the sentence in a different light while also implying I'm fully censorship which completely goes against the spirit of the rest of the paragraph. Once again, I ask what part of that policy (not an article linked to it) says anything about this case. Also read this from a real lawyer: [1] 128.227.41.117 11:46, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

yes, I left a piece out which explains one special case in which wikipedia will not censor because it isn't relevant. They probably included the example because it is something many people like to censor. Nowhere does it say that not censoring is limited to the example as you seem to imply, so I stand by my quote. The article link was merely for clarification, ignore it if you want. I already read what the EFF had to say, but thanks for the link. --MarSch 12:21, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

So you are completely implying the scope of WP:CENSOR based on what it does not say it is limited to. A strict constructionist would go mad. 128.227.41.117 12:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Some Wikipedia users should be ashamed of themselves by trying to censor a harmless string of numbers. When you look at an HD DVD and say "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" the disk does not magically start playing on your TV. Tcrow777 talk 08:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bilinear operator map

Nice work, MarSch! I've asked Oleg to do the move. Geometry guy 19:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mathematics CotW

Hey Mar, I am writing you to let you know that the Mathematics Collaboration of the week(soon to "of the month") is getting an overhaul of sorts and I would encourage you to participate in whatever way you can, i.e. nominate an article, contribute to an article, or sign up to be part of the project. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks--Cronholm144 23:16, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Algebraic link

This article desperately needs attention or deletion, I look forward to your input.--Cronholm144 03:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I see no reason for deletion. Unfortunately I don't know enough about knot theory to expand it. --MarSch 09:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't mean to misrepresent the AfD Algebraic bracket, The article looks better now, I am going through all of the mathematics articles and I only nominate articles that are obviously bad algebraic algorithm and articles that have had a request for review placed on them, but I am still new to the process. I thought the Algebraic link article was another rather weak stub, but I would rather rehabilitate it, which is why I posted here. Do you know anyone who can at least make the article more than two sentences long? Thanks--Cronholm144 14:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Your best bet is to post to the mathematics project page. But it is usually best to just wait for someone to come around to expanding stubs of their own accord. You can't really force it, except by doing a deletion nomination, as I'm sure you've noticed, but this is not a very nice way. As our content improves gradually we will attract more knowledgeable people and the difficult/obscure/specialized parts will start to get done.

Thank you for your efforts in going through and rating all those articles that you did. --MarSch 15:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Cronholm, besides asking on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics, one possibility is to go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/Participants, look at the list of interests, and pick an editor who might know something about algebraic links. It's really hard to refuse when somebody asks you personally. In this case, you could try asking User:C S, who did a lot of work on our article on knot theory. But don't tell him that I sent you ;) -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 02:38, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I already checked his page and it appears that he is on a prolonged wikibreak, much to my dismay:( But I will use his list of low-dimensional topologists and the participant page to find someone. Thanks so much.--Cronholm144 02:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

You shouldn't believe everything you read on Wikipedia ;) Look at Chan-Ho's list of contributions ... -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 04:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I have been fooled, but I already got Vectorposse to look at it.--Cronholm144 04:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiquette Alerts:Mikkalai

Howdy, following up on the discussiong in Illegal number, I thought I should let you know that there is currently a discussion about Mikkalai's behavior at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts#Incivility by User:Mikkalai. Please feel free to add your opinion. Cheers, samwaltz 10:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Invisible Pink Unicorn Logo.png

Hello MarSch, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:Invisible Pink Unicorn Logo.png) was found at the following location: User:MarSch. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 12:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Someone please upload, create and/or point me to a free alternative. --MarSch 09:34, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Antiisomorphic

Antiisomorphic has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt this is more a dictionary definition than an encyclopedia article. Please review Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary for the relevant policy. If you can expand the article to address these concerns, please do so, or explain your plans on the talk page.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the "prod" notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod notice, the deletion process will stop, but if an editor is still not satisfied that the article meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion for consensus. NickelShoe (Talk) 16:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandal

Vandal User:142.150.161.182 is back with a new IP. I notice it's repeated vandalism of Crooked Timber among other standard targets of this user. If you could deal with it, that would be great (I would but am subject to WP:COI. Thanks for all you've done already JQ 11:12, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

done --MarSch 11:32, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peter Norvig

Hi; regarding this undo, i don't understand the rationale ("there is no Norvig edit in either history or his contributions list"). User:Norvig's contribution was:

[Jamie Zawinski] came to California to work in Robert Wilensky and Peter Norvig's group at Berkeley

which is certainly a Peter Norvig related edit. —Piet Delport 20:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, Jamie Zaminski is someone different from Peter Norvig, right? User Norvig did not edit Peter Norvig. --MarSch 09:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and? :)

The template just says he edited Wikipedia, not the Peter Norvig article. (If he did, we would add the editedhere flag.) —Piet Delport 07:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I see. I guess I fail to see the point of this template in that case, but go ahead and add it back if you want. --MarSch 10:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

To keep editors informed, and populate Category:Notable Wikipedians. —Piet Delport 16:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: computer not fast enough for linux

Maybe, I am about to give my new computer (well, pre-used) a memory upgrade, then I can run Freespire or Kubuntu (I like KDE), but I might give Puppy Linux a try. Tcrow777 talk 19:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I have read farther on Puppy Linux and I will try it, I am pretty sure that I will like it. Thank you!

Thank you for signing my petition, but I am shocked at how many people have signed it so far, it appears some Wikipedians do not care about freedom. Tcrow777 talk 21:12, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your RfA

I have closed your RfA in accordance with WP:SNOW. At 20 opposes and 1 neutral and only 2 supports, I'm sorry to say that you stood no chance of passing at this time. I hope you will address the concerns mentioned by the opposition, and stand again at a later date. Acalamari 00:06, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. I think I have a snowballs chance in hell. And especially with votes (18 and 20) like:

Strong Oppose. 11 edits in the past year? •Malinaccier• ^T/C 21:37, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Oppose. Essentially an inactive, single-purpose account. Sorry. Bearian 22:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

when my actual number is quoted a few lines below:

Neutral

I'm not so sure. You look like a good content contributor with a lot of experience, but you have only 11 contributions in the past year (not counting this RFA). Melsaran (talk) 13:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Melsaran - did you mean last month ? Candidate has made 1,121 contributions so far this year based on Interiots tool. Pedro | Chat 13:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Oops, no, I meant contributions to the project namespace. :) Melsaran (talk) 13:44, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The above adminship discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion.

I think I deserve a chance to correct this and other errors and have a burocrat judge this RfA. Please be so kind to correct your mistake. Thank you. --MarSch 08:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't a mistake; if I hadn't closed the RfA, someone else would have. Your support was down to 9%. However, if you disagree with my closure, simply revert my edit and re-add your RfA to Requests for adminship if you wish. Acalamari 21:35, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] JScheme

A {{prod}} template has been added to the article JScheme, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with {{db-author}}. Leith p 09:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I see you've removed the Prod. Fair enough. Can you at least expand the article to explain what it is and why it's distinct from any other "implementation" (I'm rather unclear on what that is)? Leith p 14:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, is that unclear? I hadn't realized. An implementation of a programming language is an interpreter or a compiler for that language, a program that implements the language so you can actually use it. For Scheme it is usually quite unclear whether something is an interpreter a compiler or both so implementation is a catchall to solve that. I hope that helps. --MarSch 15:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alaibot, edit summaries

I'm a little skeptical, to be candid. It's certainly not common practice for stub-sorting when done by hand, it'd make the edit summaries much verbose, and it adds no actual new information to the edit. What'd be the actual benefit? Alai 23:21, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

the benefit would be that it would be much easier to check what your bot did, without having to open histories. Given the number of edits of your bot that is a significant saving. You should make your edit summaries as infomartive as possible. That not every editor does that does not mean that your bot shouldn't either. --MarSch 10:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your warm welcome MarSch.

I'll try contribute here, yes. Now let's try latex, $(a + b) 2 = a 2 + 2 a b + b 2$ .

It's great!

--Pxrist 18:25, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PSPP

I'm sorry, but I guess I'm failing to see it. The French "book" appears just to be an instruction manual (though, admittedly, that's from my limited ability to read French, please do correct me if I'm wrong there), and someone discussed it once. That's not comprehensive sourcing. As to consensus to delete, AfD is not a vote. Most keep rationales are irrelevant (what the software can do, what it replaces/how much that costs, none of which have a thing to do with notability or retention of an article), while the delete rationales (aside from the nomination itself, which was poor and also off-topic) are on-topic and relevant, pointing to a lack of sources (and in the end, sourceability is the primary factor in retention/deletion). The only person who states it "can be sourced easily" does not say how or provide any actual sources. I just don't see enough beyond instruction manuals for a full, comprehensive article. If and when the software actually has some real-world impact, that might change. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Caloron

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Caloron, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 16:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Caloron

An editor has nominated Caloron, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caloron and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 15:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Factorion

Sorry, but I have re-reverted to my updated version of the factorion article. If you look carefully at my changes you will see that I did not remove any information - I re-worded for greater clarity, and added internal links to number articles and an external link to the relevant OEIS sequence. And I have removed the stub tag again because I think this article, although short, says everything that there is to say about its subject. I believe that my version is a definite improevment over the old version. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

You are absolutely correct. My apologies for being so sloppy. --MarSch (talk) 09:18, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] xor in Church encoding

Why did you undo the edit that changed xor to

λm. λn. m (λa. λb. n b a) n

? That's just the full expansion of

λm. λn. m (not n) n

which is arguably the best expression of xor. Having (n a b) at the end of the expression is redundant, since that just reduces to n.

Haklo (talk) 02:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

your changing of a formula without commenting was suspect and I wasn't convinced at the time that it was valid. I see now that it is indeed also correct, but I fail to see any increase in clarity. Indeed the loss of symmetry makes it more unclear IMO. Of course you could fix that by also adding a proper definition of 'not' and then using the 'λm. λn. m (not n) n' definition you mention. --MarSch (talk) 11:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

There's a definition of "not" immediately above it, so I'll leave it to you which expression of xor should be used. FWIW I don't see the "symmetry" you mention; I think the tendency people have to put all the lambdas out the front is not as natural as it seems. -- Haklo (talk) 11:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.