User talk:Lambiam/Archive 10

; Archives
	Archive 1: January 2006 – March 2006; Archive 2: April 2006 – June 2006; Archive 3: July 2006 – September 2006; Archive 4: October 2006 – December 2006; Archive 5: January 2007 – March 2007; Archive 6: April 2007 – June 2007; Archive 7: July 2007 – September 2007; Archive 8: October 2007 – December 2007; Archive 9: January 2008 – March 2008; Archive 10: April 2008 – June 2008; Archive 11: July 2008 – September 2008; Archive 12: October 2008 – December 2008; Archive 13: January 2009 – December 2009; Archive 14: January 2010 – June 2010; Archive 15: July 2010 – December 2010; Archive 16: January 2011 – March 2011; Archive 17: April 2011 – June 2011; Archive 18: July 2011 – September 2011; Archive 19: October 2011 – December 2011; Archive 20: January 2012 – June 2012; Archive 21: July 2012 – December 2012; Archive 22: January 2013 – December 2015; Archive 23: January 2016 – December 2017; Archive 24: January 2018 – December 2019; Archive 25: January 2020 – December 2021;

P = NP problem.

Good point that it's the Simplex algorithm, not the problem, that has the worst case exponential behavior. Thanks, LouScheffer (talk) 22:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Complex number

I seem to have run into an issue where someone is reverting my edits to the lede of complex number, related to the issue you raised on WT:WPM. If you have a chance, could you look at the history of the article? — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:27, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the history. If you haven't given up on it, it would be good to have you as a participant on the talk page. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:30, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contract

Noticed you removed two Contract Law links from my Contract edits. I realized they were self-links, but it was my passive-aggressive way of suggesting that the article never defines contract law, and that perhaps contract law may make a suitable separate article someday. The one self-link you noticed and I didn't legally binding ...I can't figure why in the heck it links back to Contract... I mean the words "legally binding" appear only twice... defining what a contract is... that is circular and it shouldn't be. Would you at least be amenable to adding some specific definitions of contract law and legally binding into the article, if appropriate. Anyway, thanks for your diligence.--Marcinjeske (talk) 05:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

dimension

Hi Lambian, Would be grateful if you could reply to my comments on dimension. Thanks, Andeggs (talk) 19:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

George Washington Caldwell

Just wrote an article on John Caldwell (Michigan State Representative) who was given the name George Washington Caldwell at birth because he was born on the Fourth of July. Appreciate any tweaking you might have time for. Also submitted for DYK. Thanks. --Doug ^talk 22:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the article was just selected as a DYK. I'm trying to catch up to you. I believe I have a lot of work to do! -Doug ^talk

Ahmed Riza

Hi, I notice you stated that Ahmed Riza was Ali Kemal's father? Did you mean brother? There is an article for an Ahmet Riza (1859-1930), but also one for Ahmed Riza- do you know if these are the same people? There is an article on the Turkish wikipedia here tr:Ahmed Rıza. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 13:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. What I wonder is whether the Turkish wikipedia is correct about Ali Kemal's father being someone named Ahmed Riza? It would seem a coincidence that there was another prominent person named Ahmed Riza also in the Liberal Union, the correct age to be his brother, not his father? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 21:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, yes I saw the Spectator article. I still think they may have been confusion, as if people do not know their parent very well, i.e. Zeki Kulneralp, or Wilfred they often get stories about their family mixed up. So maybe Zeki wrote that Ahmed Riza was his father's father in his book, but he was in fact his brother? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 22:04, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I looked at the article you sent me. It is has quite a bit of detail about his early life and the time from 1912-1919 which is missing in the Wikipedia article. I wonder if we should email the author and ask if they could tell us from what publication he found this info? I note it doesn't say anything about his changing is name from Ali Riza to Ali Kemal. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 22:36, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Aziz nesin.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Aziz nesin.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 08:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hi! I'm Johan.Thanks for being a help on the Turkish people page and on the discussion page.I like discussing that and I too am very frustrated of this MHP-ish stubborn ignorant ones who keep changing it to suit their ways rather than going for the truth. J87 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.71.82 (talk) 04:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid division proposition

Referencing User talk:Lambiam/Archive 3#Invalid division proposition and User talk:Fuzzyeric#Invalid division proposition, specifically your challenge, "I defy you to produce a value x such that x³ − x² = 0 but x² − x ≠ 0."

Abstract answer: any nonzero element with nilpotence degree 2 of any algebraic structure with at least one operation.

Specific answer: $x={\begin{pmatrix}0&1\\0&0\end{pmatrix}}$ . Then $x^{2}=x^{3}={\begin{pmatrix}0&0\\0&0\end{pmatrix}}$ .

Your original claim requires that multiplication by x is an isomorphism, which is not true if that multiplication has a nontrivial nullspace ... or x has no inverse. I stand by my original claim: your step requires dividing through by an element that may be a zero divisor and therefore your step is invalid. -- Fuzzyeric (talk) 23:41, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit not supported by Data

Opening line is incorrect, and I have made changes to reflect this. Here is what I changed, and why:

Sarayburnu (Turkish: Sarayburnu, meaning Cape of the Seraglio), known in English as the Seraglio Point

Changed to:

Sarayburnu (Turkish: Sarayburnu, meaning Palace Nose; also known, Italianized, as Seraglio Point[1] )

Saray is Turkish for 'palace' and Burun, 'nose'. When paired in possession becoming 'Sarayburnu'. Just as one might refer to a 'finger of land' or 'finge lake', the Turks refer to this spur of land as a 'nose'. Likewise, the İstanbul Boğazı, the straight connecting the Black and Marmara Seas, means 'Neck of Istanbul', because of it's shape.

I updated the entry with a dictionary reference to support the Italian origin of 'Seraglio'. Here is another:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/seraglio

After consideration of these items, I invite your feed-back. Mavigogun (talk) 07:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculous Perspective?

You make several excellent observations, however, my thinking is divergent. To point:

"The Turkish word burun has several meanings, including 'headland', 'cape', 'point', 'promontory'.[1]."

Burun most definitely may convey any of these connotations. Just as we might say 'nose' referring to the front of a plane, it is understood that we are not speaking of a thing with nostrils; likewise, when one refers to the Palace Nose, it is also understood that the meanings are those you ascribe.

"For example, Cape of Good Hope is called Ümit Burnu in Turkish. Literally translated this means 'Hope Cape'; it is ridiculous to state that this means 'Hope Nose'."

Here is where we diverge: Literally. Burun literally translates to 'nose' -not any of the connotations. The above statement is literally erroneous. However, I am in total agreement within the context of the article as it is currently written, as the word 'meaning' is used.

Here is how the line formerly ran, and why it drew my focus:

Sarayburnu (Turkish: Sarayburnu, meaning Cape of the Seraglio

Sarayburnu most definitely does not mean Seraglio- rather, it is the exact opposite!

I believe a literal translation is useful because it speaks to the flavor of Turkish language and thinking; they call the Bosporus the 'İstanbul Boğazı', The Neck of Istanbul. Nothing absurd about it- they could just as easily use the word kanal, but choose to employ poetry. The word for shoe is, literally, 'foot-cup'. Within the same breath, the Sarayburnu is described as a promontory- there is no confusion about what is regarded within the scope of the article, and, I argue, does not impose an onerous burden on the sentence.

User Kafka Liz has removed the extraneous Italian reference- I think it is much clearer for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mavigogun (talk • contribs) 14:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unproductive

I appreciate that you have taken the time to share your perspective, but don't find rancor or expressions of contempt on topic or productive. To point, Your words, 'The fact that you think this "speaks to the flavor of Turkish language" and don't see how ridiculous this sounds, suggests to me that you are not a native English speaker.', don't buttress your opinions, nor are they conductive to an atmosphere of congenial peer review and discovery. However, that said, your illustration of dağ eteği is an excellent example of my thinking -and how it differs from yours. This is a good thing (the ability to communicate differences in perception) but what use is it -unless we are open to ascribing value to the other? In my mind 'Mountain Skirt' paints a vivid, useful image -thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mavigogun (talk • contribs) 06:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Westermarkt, Amsterdam

Thanks for your input on my recent Language Reference Desk query. I realized in advance that there was some crossover between describing the statue's location relative to Westermarkt vs. Westerkerk, but I'm obliged to adhere to the source text. So I still remain somewhat unsure how to word this caption... but as pursuing this further falls along the lines of "independent research" and accordingly discouraged, your remarks are indeed helpful! -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 11:56, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wehrgesetzes: here, there, and everywhere :-)

I so admire your thoroughness, dear Lambiam! In my attempt to position my recent queries and responses where they're most appropriately recorded (for the sake of posterity/respective pages), I hadn't realized I'd orphaned a prior citation, which you cleverly noticed and restored the attribution. I continue to learn from you, both method and content. Please note that over the weekend I'll incorporate this information into the mainspace page (unless you beat me to it...!), where I'd initially found it lacking. -- Humble thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 08:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

not unsourced

Look at the diagram in the upper right hand corner and you will find the source. However, if you are going to be an ingrate about my effort to transpose the information provided by the diagram into spreadsheet form then it is no skin off my back but rather off the back of users who will now have to elsewhere for clarification of the information provided by the diagram. It is they whom you have failed to serve. -- Taxa (talk) 14:41, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes of Turkey

Hi there just created some userboxes, if you want to use them then please do. Thankyou. Assalamu Alaykum. Moshin (talk) 19:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC) [1][reply]