Open main menu

Contents

From Dank55Edit

Hi, Andreas, please see my message about your edit on Robot on my userpage (I didn't put it elsewhere because it's "chatty"). — Dan Dank55 (talk) 17:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

CGT and BaseEdit

Howdy, I noticed you cleaned up some articles in the CGT and Algorithms categories.

Did you delete the CGT cat from articles because they may have used CGT, but they did not actually discuss CGT? The article Base (group theory) is fairly stubby, but a significant percentage of the article discusses CGT, and actually an incredibly significant amount of research on permutation group bases is done by the computational group theory community. I plan on expanding the article and adding back the category. First, I wanted to check if you had a different understanding of the article or of the category.

I am also curious about removing the Algorithms category, but I think I agree with it. I think that articles in the Algorithms category are usually of interest to computer science people, but computational group theory is often not interesting to computer science people. I want to understand the category better, and so I am curious why you removed the algorithms category. I have no intention of putting the Algorithms category back. JackSchmidt (talk) 20:31, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I overlooked the following statement in Base (group theory): "...Bases and strong generating sets are concepts of importance in computational group theory" and thought that the article doesn't belong to CGT. Now I reverted my change.
I made complete CGT category belong to 'Algorithms' category. Due to this articles from CGT category don't need to have 'Algorithms' category themselfs. Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 21:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Excellent, thanks! Yes, CGT as a subcategory of algorithms seems like a very good idea. Right now the categories sort of say "Computational group theory is the intersection of algorithms and group theory," and while not strictly true, it is a very good summary. Thanks for cleaning up categories. It is hard, and many people do not notice, but it very much improves wikipedia! JackSchmidt (talk) 21:49, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Genetic Algorithms and category AlgorithmsEdit

Andreas, you removed Genetic Algorithms from the Category algorithms. Sorry, but I reverted; to me it seems obvious. Could you stop by the talk and explain? I would agree that GA doesn't get much attention from theory of complexity, but the technique is definitely an algorithm and has very wide application. Pete St.John (talk) 22:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Dangling elseEdit

You changed the category from "Programming language topics" to "Programming language implementation" but I would say the the dangling else is a language design issue and not an implementation issue Iccaldwell (talk) 09:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually this is a problem to be solved during parser or grammatic construction. I changed the category now to 'Parsing'. Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 18:51, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Engineering Mathematics through ApplicationsEdit

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Engineering Mathematics through Applications, 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 should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? silly rabbit (talk) 20:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


Fair use rationale for Image:BoardDefiniftion in ZOG.pngEdit

Thanks for uploading Image:BoardDefiniftion in ZOG.png. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 09:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Your change to Differential Execution pageEdit

Hi Andreas, I noticed you removed from the Differential_Execution page a reference to the category Programming Language Topics. I'm wondering why. I put in that category link because Differential Execution is an incremental control structure that can in principle be applied to any program in any language, so it has broad applicability. Perhaps there is a better category to put it in? Thanks, MikeDunlavey (talk) 22:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

This article has a category "Programming constructs", which is a subcategory of "Programming language topics". This is why the article don't need to have category "Programming language topics". Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 10:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Your change to Anomaly detection pageEdit

Anomaly detection is discussed in numerous Computer Science academic papers about intrusion detection. Why did you remove the Computer Science category on this page? --Clangin (talk) 20:15, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

"Computer science" category is too broad, it should mainly contain subcategories and list only very few articles directly, as now, see Category:Computer science. The intrusion detection belongs to Category:Data security, I will add this category to Anomaly detection too. Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 20:15, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I am following up with this on Talk:Computer science If you want to respond, please respond either there or on my talk page so that I don't have to watch your talk page. --Clangin (talk) 23:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Fox and geese.jpgEdit

Thanks for uploading Image:Fox and geese.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
  • That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 09:14, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Merge categories "Variable" and "Variable (computer programming)Edit

Thanks for giving your opinion. I have put my reply here. --Antonielly (talk) 18:52, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

George H.D. GossipEdit

Andreas, would you have time to review Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/George H.D. Gossip? There are unresolved questions about the sourcing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:17, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Extreme quality assuranceEdit

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Extreme quality assurance, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

WP:Notability

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, 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. Ismarc (talk) 03:01, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Korean chess.png)Edit

  Thanks for uploading File:Korean chess.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Move of disjoint-set data structureEdit

Hi, I noticed you moved disjoint-set data structure recently to disjoint set (data structure). Although I realize this is a conventional naming structure for data structures, it doesn't make any sense in this case, as it's implying that the article describes a "data structure" called "disjoint set", which it doesn't - it describes a data structure designed to represent disjoint sets, which is described by the compound term "disjoint-set data structure." To draw an analogy this is like moving ice cream to ice (cream). I'd like to move it back if you don't object. Dcoetzee 23:42, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Hm, a strange terminology. We talk about 'set', 'map' etc. without any problem and mean 'set data type', 'map data type' etc. Can't we say 'disjoint sets' and mean 'desjoint sets abstract data type'? Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 19:37, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
The difference is that a disjoint-set data structure is not a representation of a "disjoint set" (which isn't even a meaningful term) but a collection of pairwise disjoint sets. More importantly, this is the term used in the literature and libraries; the use of "disjoint set" by itself to refer to a type of data structure is nonexistent. Dcoetzee 20:10, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Ok, I just undid my move. Thanks for explanations! Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 20:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
No problem, thanks for your openness to discussion on the matter. :-) Dcoetzee 02:48, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Information Fuzzy NetworksEdit

Hi Andreas,

I noticed that you remove the algorithms category from Information Fuzzy Networks. I think that the category is in place since Information Fuzzy Networks is an algorithm. Can I return the category?

Thank, WhatWasDone (talk) 18:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

This article already has category "Classification algorithms", which is a subcategory of "Algorithms". Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 17:18, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Oh. Is it a general rule? Should I always use the most specific category? Thanks, WhatWasDone (talk) 08:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes. Please see Subcategorization for more details. Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 21:57, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Software performance optimizationEdit

I have nominated Category:Software performance optimization (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Program optimization (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Pcap ping 17:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Chess_positionEdit

 Template:Chess_position has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. SunCreator (talk) 00:30, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Chess diagram templateEdit

Not sure if you have Wikipedia_talk:Books/Chess_variants on your watchlist so just a prompt as would be nice to know what issue is. Regards SunCreator (talk) 00:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Graph algorithmsEdit

Hey, I noticed you changed the category of many graph theory articles to graph algorithms. While I agree that graph theory is too general a category for those problems, graph algorithms doesn't seem appropriate for problems like Hamiltonian path problem, Longest path problem, Canadian traveller problem, etc. because they're not algorithms, they're just problems. Ironically, they're also problems for which we don't have efficient algorithms and would like to have one! So I created a new category for such articles, and have populated it with 20+ articles: Category:Computational problems in graph theory. Feel free to add such problems to this category. --Robin (talk) 14:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of category program testing tools for breakpointEdit

A breakpoint is a program testing tool. If not, what else is it? I suggest you put it back! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.206.134 (talk) 13:35, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Breakpoints are used for program debugging, not testing. Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 11:13, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

PROD for booksEdit

Proposed deletion (books), an adaptation of the PROD process for Wikipedia-Books has been proposed. Since you are a member of WP:WBOOKS, discussion and comments would be appreciated. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 20:10, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Chess problem and ChessEdit

Hi, as a past contributor to Chess problem could you revist the article and add any references you may have. There is an issue of summarised work in Chess#Chess_composition that is also largely unreferenced. 03:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SunCreator (talkcontribs)

PediaPress renderer for Wikipedia BooksEdit

I thought you might be interested in this. Basically, this would give you access to the PediaPress renderer used to print books and should allow you to review book as they would be printed (minus covers). If you find errors and problems, please report them at Help:Books/Feedback.

You either received this message because

  • You edited several books
  • You are part of WikiProject Wikipedia-Books. (If you aren't, please free free to join in. We'll take any help we can.)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Headbomb (talk) at 16:03, 21 September 2010 (UTC).

Chess variants subcategoriesEdit

Hi Andreas, nice to meet you. I'm new to WP, I have ein fragen about Chess variant subcategories, I'm sure you can answer. (Why aren't there subcategories, like, "Hexagonal variants", "3D variants", etc.? I guess I would like to see at least those two. Plus one more: "V. R. Parton variants". (He made a lot. For example, a WP subcategory exists: "Gary Gygax games". So why can't there similarily be subcategory "V. R. Parton games"?). But ich kann auch verstehe, that the number of subcatagories could grow uncontrollably. [Is this the reason more subcategories have not been already added? I see there is one: "Capablanca Chess variants". Is that exception!? Why?]) Danke, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 12:00, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Welcome to Wikipedia! Adding categories makes sense only if there are many articles for certain topic. The topics you mentioned hardly have 3-4 articles each. So, it seems to be too early to create special categories them. Category 'Capablanca chess variants' was not created by me and actually I think it is rather redundant. By the way, thanks for expanding article on V. R. Parton! Andreas Kaufmann (talk) 20:34, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for your explain. (I was confused.) p.s. Working on Parton article was fun! Ihardlythinkso (talk) 09:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Icc kriegspiel.pngEdit

 

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Icc kriegspiel.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:26, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Non-Free rationale for File:Zillions of games.jpgEdit

 

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Zillions of games.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under Non-Free content criteria but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a Non-Free rationale.

If you have uploaded other Non-Free media, consider checking that you have specified the Non-Free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:42, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Icc kriegspiel.pngEdit

Thanks for uploading File:Icc kriegspiel.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:10, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Pocket mutation chessEdit

Proposed deletion of Pocket mutation chessEdit

 

The article Pocket mutation chess has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No real claim of notability, the only source is essentially self-published so lacks independent second-party sourcing.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Quale (talk) 04:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Chadarangam for deletionEdit

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chadarangam 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/Chadarangam until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good 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 template from the top of the article. SundaraRaman (talk) 10:30, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

ZoG TO BE REMOVED IN 2015Edit

My sources are the website traffic info sites, which allow you to type in a website, and view that website's traffic and contractual agreement.

  Well, I typed "ZILLIONS-OF-GAMES", and although ZoG is in the 4,000,000 range of website importance, with 42 visits per day, I clicked for detailed contractual info, and ZoG's contract expires on FEB 27, 2015.

I don't know if Mallett is going to create a next-gen, new ZoG for 2015 onward, or if Mallett is simply going to let ZoG die, and all ZRF's will be lost, or recorded in cold-case storage on Mallett's computers, or what.


WIKIPEDIA profile user: Jon Steven Nelson Jon Steven Nelson (talk) 15:45, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Sittuyin.pngEdit

 

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sittuyin.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:36, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Sittuyin setup.pngEdit

 

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sittuyin setup.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Category:Method (computer science)Edit

Category:Method (computer science), which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. —Ruud 22:47, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


Talk:Chess handicap/GA1Edit

Chess handicap, an article to which you have contributed, has been nominated for Good Article. The review is on hold to allow time for issues raised to be discussed or addressed. SilkTork ✔Tea time 17:45, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!Edit

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!Edit

 Hello, Andreas Kaufmann. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!Edit

 Hello, Andreas Kaufmann. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Three-check chess for deletionEdit

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Three-check chess 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/Three-check chess 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. Izno (talk) 04:18, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Andreas Kaufmann".