User talk:Cullinane

Wikipedia welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
Follow the Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset
Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 14:32, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

hi there

Hi Steven,

Just a little friendly unsolicited advice. I suggest you check out Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. I'm concerned that some of your recent edits might be getting a little too close to the boundary of what's considered acceptable, in terms of self-promotion. Not dangerously close, but just enough to make me notice. Please be careful, and don't get carried away. And thanks for starting work on reflection group; I'm surprised an article of that title didn't exist already. Dmharvey File:User dmharvey sig.png Talk 05:23, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the friendly warning. I agree that I've been getting a little too close to the boundary, in terms of self-promotion, but I have tried to be carefully self-promoting-- with the exception of a contribution to "Mathematics and art" that was blatantly self-promotional, just to test the limits. It was rightly altered. I have added, where they were missing, discussion sections to all articles I have altered, with notes on the alterations I have made. Please let me know in those or any future new discussion sections if I'm too near or over the boundary, and of course feel free to remove any out-of-bounds additions I make. Glad you like the "reflection group" article-- If it weren't for self-promotion, the article would not exist. ;) Cullinane 10:14, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Style remarks

Hi Steven. I see you are rather new, so I came to bug you (with very tiny styllistical matters). First, one should make the variables italic, so n is better than simply n. Second, instead of nxn one should write n×n which looks so much better (doesn't it? :) Lastly, when you make links, it is good that they flow naturally with the text, and one should not use capitals and undersocres in links.

Thank you for your contributions to orthogonality. I fixed the items mentioned above, this is just a remark for future reference (better tell people once than fix after them a lot of times :) I hope you enjoy it here. Oleg Alexandrov 00:01, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the style tips; I'll try to remember the "times" notation. I used underscores because without them, sometimes letters in words that are separated do not get underlined in a link with a line break. Any way to get around this? Cullinane 02:00, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is not a good idea to have a link break in a link to start with. :) By the way, if you try to edit this text, you will see many lines, but in fact there are no linea breaks except between paragraphs. So I think that unless somebody on the very purpuse hits the "Return" key to create line breaks, they will not show up and everything will be allright. (And underscores are so ugly. :) Oleg Alexandrov 02:19, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your statement that "it is not a good idea to have a line break in a link" presumably applies to breaks created by the author. I meant the breaks at the end of lines that are automatically supplied by the program, not by the author. Yes, underscores are ugly, but no, everything will not be all right. Example:

"For a mathematical example of such a mechanism using the cubes of psychologists' block design tests, see Block Designs in Art and Mathematics."

When I view the above, the letter "s" at the end of "Designs" comes at the end of a line and is not underlined in the link. This is half-assed programming on the part of whoever wrote the Wikipedia software. I need a solution to the problem, not a defense of Wikipedia. But thanks anyway... and skip the smileys... I am not naturally friendly, and smileys do not make me any friendlier.

I managed to reproduce what you say. Yes, looks bad. But I am not sure inserting underscores is the right way to fix it. OK, I leave this up to you. :) Oleg Alexandrov 15:14, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also, what is your Wikipedia source for the doctrine that one should not use capitals in links? They seem natural if the link contains a title. Or do you mean that all titles should have only the first letter capitalized? Cullinane 04:44, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Headings they say that section names should not have capitals other than first word. I am not sure about links though. Therefore, I will not bug you anymore. :) Oleg Alexandrov 15:14, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the tips. By the way, the math links on your user page, and the discussions on your user talk page, are quite helpful. :) Cullinane 17:14, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject mathematics

Hi,

Welcome to Wikipedia. Thought I should mention that most of the general math discussion occurs at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics, which is the talk page for Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics linas 04:26, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

blew what up?

Hi. On the page kaleidoscope, which I believe you created, reference is made to a kaleidoscope being blown up by a German. I did not understand what it was that he had blown up, and the statement hangs in the air somewhat (actually, it lacks a full stop as well, which adds to the hanging-in-the-air feeling). Could I ask you to clarify it when you have a chance? --Adam Brink 09:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Your belief that I created the kaleidoscope article is unfounded. I know nothing about the alleged blowing-up, but I agree that the statement about the German makes no sense. I suggest it be deleted. --Cullinane 23:20, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blitz by Charles Matthews

The following revisions were made by Charles Matthews on Oct. 2, 2006:

   * Affine group‎; 18:46 . . Charles Matthews
              (rm Cullinane spam)
   * Reflection group‎; 18:45 . . Charles Matthews
              (rm Cullinane spam)
   * Symmetry in mathematics‎; 18:42 . . Charles Matthews
              (rm diamond theorem spam)
   * Incidence structure‎; 18:42 . . Charles Matthews
              (rm diamond theorem spam)
   * Invariant (mathematics)‎; 18:40 . . Charles Matthews
              (rm diamond theorem spam)
   * Symmetry‎; 18:39 . . Charles Matthews
              (rm diamond theorem spam)
   * Finite geometry‎; 18:39 . . Charles Matthews
              (rm diamond theorem spam)
   * Group action‎; 18:38 . . Charles Matthews
              (Examples - rm diamond theorem spam)
   * History of geometry‎; 17:03 . . Charles Matthews
              (The 20th century - rm 'diamond theorem' spam)

From Matthews's User Talk on Oct. 2:

Diamond theorem spam

I saw that you removed Cullinane's stuff about the diamond theorem and the eightfold cube from Group action. He has done this other places [1] as well, e.g., PSL(2,7). Are you thinking that a general clean-up might be in order? Michael Kinyon 19:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Treat on merits. For example his link for the Walsh function page I left. I don't think the 'diamond theorem' is anything serious, so I started with blitzing that. I left something on quaternion group. Charles Matthews 19:20, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Too time consuming to do otherwise, anyway. Michael Kinyon 19:23, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough? -- Cullinane 21:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blitz by anonymous New Delhi user

31 May, 2007:

Shown below is a list of 25 alterations to Wikipedia math articles made today by user 122.163.102.246.

All of the alterations involve removal of links placed by user Cullinane (myself).

The 122.163... IP address is from an internet service provider in New Delhi, India.

The New Delhi anonymous user was apparently inspired by an earlier blitz by Wikipedia administrator Charles Matthews (see above).

Related material:

Ashay Dharwadker and Usenet Postings
and Talk: Four color theorem/Archive 2.

See also some recent comments from 122.163...
at Talk: Four color theorem.

May 31 2007 alterations by
user 122.163.102.246:

17:17 Orthogonality (rm spam)
17:16 Symmetry group (rm spam)
17:14 Boolean algebra (rm spam)
17:12 Permutation (rm spam)
17:10 Boolean logic (rm spam)
17:08 Gestalt psychology (rm spam)
17:05 Tesseract (rm spam)
17:02 Square (geometry) (rm spam)
17:00 Fano plane (rm spam)
16:55 Binary Golay code (rm spam)
16:53 Finite group (rm spam)
16:52 Quaternion group (rm spam)
16:50 Logical connective (rm spam)
16:48 Mathieu group (rm spam)
16:45 Tutte–Coxeter graph (rm spam)
16:42 Steiner system (rm spam)
16:40 Kaleidoscope (rm spam)
16:38 Efforts to Create A Glass Bead Game (rm spam)
16:36 Block design (rm spam)
16:35 Walsh function (rm spam)
16:24 Latin square (rm spam)
16:21 Finite geometry (rm spam)
16:17 PSL(2,7) (rm spam)
16:14 Translation plane (rm spam)
16:13 Block design test (rm spam)

The deletions should please Charles Matthews and fans of Ashay Dharwadker's work as a four-color theorem enthusiast and as editor of the Open Directory sections on combinatorics and on graph theory.

There seems little point in protesting the deletions while Wikipedia still allows any anonymous user to change their articles.

-- Cullinane 23:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain (through Wikipedia E-mail, or on my talk page) if you think there's a problem with DMOZ, or file an abuse report. I'll investigate to the best of my ability. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:19, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous New Delhi user strikes again

This morning at 11:12 and 11:15 UTC, I edited the article Logical connective to correct an instance of careless copying that omitted credit to a web page I had written. Twenty minutes later, at 11:33 and 11:34 UTC, an anonymous user in New Delhi (doubtless the same one discussed above), 122.163.102.174, deleted my edits. Cullinane 11:56, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please expalin why your link satisfies WP:RS or WP:EL? I think that removal justified, even if you might have an anon Wikistalker. (Please ask on WT:AIV how to report an anon Wikistalker without a fixed IP address. I don't think you have one, but WP:AIV clearly isn't going to work for you.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:15, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re report at WP:AIV

Hi, I have removed the above vandal report. You have not warned the ip, or even written to them on their talkpage. They had also "only" reverted twice, thus not violating 3RR. You also did not sign your report at AIV. Please follow all procedures before reporting "vandalism" in future. Thank you. LessHeard vanU 13:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. In an instance where the ip changes (but in the same range) when editing/vandalising an article the best response would be to bring the matter to Admins Noticeboard (incidents) with diffs indicating similar edits from differing ip's. This may alert admins to watch the article, to quickly respond to continued violations, to semi-protect the article, and may result in a range block (usually of short term). As you may be aware ip addresses are very rarely blocked more than for a short duration, owing to the inconvenience to other editors using them. AIV reports are for more "quickly fixable/easily determined" acts of vandalism. I hope this helps. LessHeard vanU 20:10, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I put a notice on the Admins Noticeboard, as you suggested. Cullinane 20:41, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Logical connective" vandalism

From a reply on his talk page to User:Arthur_Rubin today:

Thank you for your inquiry on my user talk page, "Please explain why your link satisfies WP:RS or WP:EL?" For an explanation, see the new web page "Venn Diagrams and Finite Geometry" about the article on Logical connective. Cullinane 13:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you also for a separate inquiry today on my user talk page, "Please explain (through Wikipedia E-mail, or on my talk page) if you think there's a problem with DMOZ, or file an abuse report. I'll investigate to the best of my ability. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:19, 28 September 2007 (UTC)"

Yes there is a problem wth DMOZ. For details, follow the links in the web page "Ashay Dharwadker and Usenet Postings".

For further evidence, see the DMOZ page on graph theory that is edited by Ashay Dharwadker.

Of the 30 links there, 6 are to Dharwadker's own pages at

http://www.geocities.com/dharwadker/

The home page of the Geocities site is devoted to Dharwadker's alleged proof of the four-color theorem.

For an appraisal of the alleged proof, see the archived Wikipedia discussion.

Anyone who questions the alleged proof is liable to be attacked under a variety of aliases. For an example other than myself, see the attacks by 122.163.***.*** and by "Rstewart" on Wikipedia administrator Jitse Niesen in May and June of this year.

If such attacks and vandalism are temporarily stopped by blocking the New Delhi IPs beginning with 122.163, they will likely resume from a new Internet service provider or proxy. Nevertheless, such a block seems worthwhile. Cullinane 17:55, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edited version of a reply by Greg Bard to my implication that his Venn diagrams illustration was not original:

The arrangement of those diagrams are NOT from your website. That arrangement follows a logical pattern that A) has been published in numerous other places, long before your website, and B) follows a logical pattern such that it does not impart any new information that every rational being already knows directly. The pattern is no coincidence because it follows a logical pattern, not because it was copied from your site. Furthermore, the convention of shaded areas as "false" and white areas as "true" is the prevailing convention in literature on the topic.

I do not know anything about a user from New Dehli abusing an account. That is a separate matter, and should be dealt with appropriately. If this user's actions instigated this accusation on myself, please re-evaluate your motivations. It seems that you added your page as a reference to that section, which is a welcome contribution, and it was removed by someone, which I agree is dumb. Please do not take your bad experience out on me. Also, the name Johnston diagram is the one used by an existing Wikipedia image which was the basis for the rest.

The only reason your page containing this arrangement is mentioned, is so as to explain a tesseract representation of the operators. This representation, interestingly, was removed from Wikipedia because it was believed by one person to perhaps be an arbitrary arrangement. The presence of the arrangement of diagrams on your page is unremarkable, non-original, and non-creative. Your belief that your page is the source of this arrangement is false, and the edit history of the page in question is consistent with that fact.

Be well, Greg Bard 23:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your illustration of Venn diagrams at the Logical connective article-- I retract the offensive term you strongly, and perhaps rightly, objected to today. You are right in surmising that the Dharwadker encounter made me lose my temper. I will this evening remove all instances of the offensive term (including those that previously appeared above) The above material has been edited to that end. Cullinane 23:18, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I want to thank you again for your conciliatory note on this matter. Thank you for being more than decent about it. Be well, Greg Bard 23:29, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Cullinane. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Cullinane. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cullinane. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Cullinane. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reaching out

I just edited Steiner system to revert someone's deletion of your affine space thing. You have good information but your links are bizarre at times. Instead of linking to your own website (or worse, screenshots of your own website) could you post links to your work on AMS or any reviewed journal? Even if it's the same information, having it come from an external source gives it more credibility than coming from your website / blog. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1:9249:1987:F646:224A:543F:B04D (talk) 02:38, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cullinane diamond theorem moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Cullinane diamond theorem. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 09:12, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cullinane diamond theorem (October 8)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Cullinane diamond theorem and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 22:31, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cullinane! Having an article draft 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! KylieTastic (talk) 22:31, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Cullinane diamond theorem

Hello, Cullinane. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Cullinane diamond theorem, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:29, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia welcome

hi there

Style remarks

Wikiproject mathematics

blew what up?

Blitz by Charles Matthews

Blitz by anonymous New Delhi user

Anonymous New Delhi user strikes again

re report at WP:AIV

"Logical connective" vandalism

More link alterations by anonymous users

ArbCom elections are now open!

ArbCom elections are now open!

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Reaching out

Cullinane diamond theorem moved to draftspace

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cullinane diamond theorem (October 8)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Concern regarding Draft:Cullinane diamond theorem