User talk:Milogardner

Hello; Here is the boiler-plate welcome message, which includes some useful links:

Welcome!

Hello, Milogardner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

Tom Harrison ^Talk 14:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to post on my talk page, but more people will see it if you use the article talk page. Also, if you want to prepare a draft you can make a subpage in your user space, like User:Milogardner/sandtable. Tom Harrison ^Talk 03:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Created a user page for you

Hi Milo! I created a very simple user page, at your request. Edit and change it to include some information about you if you want. Look at some other people's user pages for examples. Some people include a link to their personal website. It is generally advised to not include your email address. (There is some official policy on what can go in user pages but I can't find it right now). EdJohnston 17:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ed, thanks for setting up my talk pape. I'll have to find the the best spot to list my latest blog, a rough set of info - at the present time:

http://liberabaci.blogspot.com

To generally introduce myself, a short bio is found at the end of the following blog:

http://egyptianmath.blogspot.com

For now, back to updating the Liber Abaci, and Sigler's comments.

Milogardner 12:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptian fraction

Two encyclopedic sources have been added. Thanks for the heads up. Milogardner 23:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Akhmim Wooden Tablet

Someone tagged this article for speedy deletion due to lack of context. I fleshed it out a bit based on the MathWorld entry. Two comments:

To avoid having new articles speedy-tagged and deleted, don't create them in mainspace until they're substantive enough to stand alone. Promising to expand it in the edit summary isn't enough. You can create drafts in your userspace, eg. User:Milogardner/Ahkmim Wooden Tablet, if you want to work on the article before it's ready for mainspace.
I'm admittedly not knowledgeable about this topic, but having done a quick google search, I wasn't able to find any obvious reference that didn't trace back to you. Quite possibly because people don't post these things on the internet much. It would help if you would provide an academic, scholarly work that discusses this tablet and the interpretation presented at MathWorld.

Thanks! Opabinia regalis 00:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Milo. Some of the recent material you've posted, eg Akhmim Wooden Tablet, Reisner Papyrus, etc., is largely republication of content you've posted on your blogs. While the material is interesting, it appears to be substantially your original work, as also implied by the message you left me. You have probably seen the Wikipedia:No original research policy, which prevents us from publishing novel content, even if the scholarship itself is sound. In these articles on ancient documents, are the interpretations your own, or are you reporting and summarizing the conclusions of a published source? If the latter, you will need to include the complete biblographical information of the source you are working from. Please read up on Wikipedia formatting - see Help:Editing for basic details, or if you're already aware of this, please start using it when you create new articles.

I know some of the people Milo has worked with on this and other Egyptian math projects. Its probably best represented as research, but not entirely original research as there are people at Stanford, Buffalo and like institutions working on it also going back to Peet, Gilings and others Rktect 01:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a secondary point, new messages are posted on users' talk pages. You posted your message at User:Opabinia regalis, when you wanted User talk:Opabinia regalis. Opabinia regalis 01:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. To answer your question, I don't know anything about this particular subject, so I'm not in a position to be complaining about anyone's inconsistencies relating to it. However, it is not our place to correct 'scholarly inconsistencies', even if we think they're obviously problematic. I'm not sure what you mean by "this linking up of documents"; could you explain? It seems likely that, if it really is "a step others have not attempted", we shouldn't be doing it either.

BTW, it's also fine to reply here rather than on my talk page; it's usually easier for others joining the conversation to catch up if the whole thread is in one place. Opabinia regalis 02:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scholarly inconsistencies are common when almost any subject is allowed, without footnote or justification, to wander back 80- 120 years, at ease, as if no progress had taken place in the interium, as if scholarly books had been randomly picked off a library shelf. This random book situation sadly has existed in several Wikipedia Egyptian mathematics discussions, before linkages began to improve the outdated reporting of the Middle Kingdom math texts. Early scholarly discussions (before 1927) had stressed minimalist additive views. That is, the math texts were almost never read beyond an additive context, even when large segments of texts could not be otherwise deciphered.

A major change took place after the turn of the century. Beginning in 2002 The Egyptian Mathematical Leather Roll, the Akhmim Wooden Tablet (Hana Vymazalova), and the medical text hekat subunits (over 2,000 pieces of data) began to be read. The hekat sub-units were read by Tanja Pemmerening without error, correcting 100 years of confusion. The updated AWT and medical text methods and facts were first reported in independent 2002 masters, and then two 2005 PhD thesis (Vymazova, Pemmerening). The same class of major change continues to update the scope and content of Egyptian mathematics, re-connecting the highest hekat weights and measures, from which the medical texts created dja and other subunits were connected, to the parent Akhmim Wooden Tablet and its vivid remainder arithmetic (that had been oddly unreported 1927).

In conclusion, it is time for Wikipedia Egyptian fraction and other ancient Egyptian math topics to be fairly recognized, by their post-2001 scholary papers. Yes, I see the past confusion of Wikipedia topics being corrected by being directed to the a wider range of Middle Kingdom texts.

The RMP is an excellent case in point. At least four texts 200-350 years older, and each was used to draft identifiable RMP problems, possibly 50 of Ahmes' 84 problems. The 2/nth table can now be read as many had hoped to read in 1927 (Chace et al), if only by linking EMLR, AWT, MMP and the Reisner Papyri and dryly reporting each text's contents, and so forth. Milogardner 22:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. If these articles reflect recent scholarship, that's great (assuming these PhD theses were done under the supervision of other reliable people), and it's great that you're updating and adding to a little-edited area. But in order for readers to get anything out of them, you really should wikify them, add internal links, and add formatted references in a separate references section. Just at first glance at the current state of the AWT article, I have no idea what a 'hekat' is, besides 'an Egyptian unit of measure', or who 'Peet' is at first mention, and the comments about Daressy 'getting confused' sound POV without clearer citation. Opabinia regalis 02:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't know who Peet and Gillings are, or what the Egyptian standards of measure are and want to look them up in Wikipedia, work with Milo he knows his stuff.Rktect 01:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestions. Wikifying the various Egyptian math links is important. Easy to read reviews of confusing topic is a proper complaint. For example, the hekat volume unit is found by the squaring the circle, defined in the MMP, but not clearly defined elsewhere. Mentioning the hekat as a volume unit elsewhere is a great idea as well. This type of clear Wikifying definition, and your other linking suggestions will be followed. Thanks. Milogardner 14:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its important but when you try to connect the dots to show the networking with other cultures like the Greeks who were still working with Egyptian unit fractions in medieval times for the excellent reason that they were efficient and accurate, or state why it would be important to the Egyptians to be able to square a circle when working with hekats, I'll bet you get told squaring a circle can't be done and charges of original research even if you cite Gillings because about 90% of the people editing the articles have never read the basic source material. Would it be useful to mention other examples as with architectural proportions?Rktect 19:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright issue with Akhmim Wooden Tablet

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Akhmim Wooden Tablet, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://akhmimwoodentablet.blogspot.com/. As a copyright violation, Akhmim Wooden Tablet appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Akhmim Wooden Tablet has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Akhmim Wooden Tablet. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Akhmim Wooden Tablet, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Philippe Beaudette 18:00, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This topic began as a copy of the blog, owned by myself, hence the Wikipedia information has recieved proper approval. In any case, a Wikifying of the info is taking place, introducing links and other text changes that are quickly diverging from the original blos. In a few weeks I may not even recognize my own blog writing appearing in this Wikipedia topic. Thanks for the 'heads up'. Milogardner 18:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the pain with that article - I know that one's been trouble for you. I'm sure you understand that Wikipedia is, perhaps, over-cautious about copyright and intellectual property. As long as you carefully credit the original author (even when it's yourself) and show how it's fair use of the information, you're usually okay. You might check out WP:Copyright for more information. Thanks for your willingness to work through this, and for the great information you're adding! Philippe Beaudette 18:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hekat

Hey Milo. I had wiki-linked hekat (go ahead, click it), you'll see that the "Hekat" article has nothing to do with the hekat you're talking about. So I removed the "[[ ]]" and said "wrong kind of hekat". Since there is no article about the unit of measurement "hekat", I had suggested that you consider creating one. I would help, but i'm math-retarded. -Taco325i 15:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hey did you read this yet? we are talking about different things. you're talking about something substantive, i'm talking about the formatting of the article. -Taco325i

I see what you mean. I'll look into the subject. Thanks, Milogardner 20:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can click on this, and begin editing: hekat (volume unit). Is that what it is? a volume unit? I have no idea. But you get the idea... -Taco325i 21:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you're becoming a wikipro. Ok, when you make a link for [[hekat (volume unit)]], try doing this [[hekat (volume unit)|hekat]]. the first part is the name of the article, and the second part is what shows when you're reading it. -Taco325i 00:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok i fixed the hekat article. -Taco325i 21:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

adding 3,700 years of Egyptian fraction math

http://planetmath.org/encyclopedia/WhyStudyEgyptianFractionMathematics.html

is broken down by Egyptian, 2050 BCE to 400 BCE Greek/Hellene, 600 BCE to 800 AD, Arab and medieval, 800 AD to 1637 AD.

Junk reverted

Bare URLs, ext links in See also section, links to forums; not good. Dicklyon (talk) 17:33, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Junk

You posted some junk to my user page User:Dicklyon. If you have something you want to talk about, please make a new section at the bottom of User talk:Dicklyon instead. Or respond here. Dicklyon (talk) 19:49, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand you like this link: http://planetmath.org/encyclopedia/EgyptianAndGreekSquareRoot.html – because you inserted it into my comment above, which I'm now fixing, as well as in some other inappropriate places. I tried to point out above, perhaps too tersely, that we don't put external links in "See also" sections, and we don't usually put bare links. See WP:EL for more about appropriate ways to get your link into articles. If you're having trouble, e.g. from people like me reverting you, then bring it up on the article's talk page, preferably using English sentences to say what your intent is, and to ask for help from more experienced editors. Dicklyon (talk) 01:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thank you .. this issue will resolve itself shortly...

math is my language ... English is only a means to an end ..

Your ban from the topic of Egyptian mathematics

Milo, this is a reminder that you are indefinitely banned from the topic of Egyptian mathematics on both article and talk pages. With some of your edits in January and February of this year you violated your ban. For example, in this edit you added a link to a posting by you on Planetmath which mentions Egyptian mathematics. You also made several edits at Talk:Egyptian mathematics. This is a talk page which your ban forbids you to edit. Please ensure that these violations aren't repeated, or a block maybe necessary. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 19:04, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Akhmim wooden tablets may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

the work required the scribe multiplied the two-part number by 11 and showed the result 63/64) + 1/64 = 64/64, as all five proofs reported .

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:16, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Square root, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berlin Papyrus. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 21 January 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) 16:28, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Milogardner. 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]

There have over the years been numerous problems with your editing. After a long break you have returned to editing, and at least some of the same problems are still there. I originally drafted a message to you containing detailed description of some of the problems in the hope of helping you avoid them, but before posting that message I discovered that they have all been documented in the past in various places, including Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Milogardner, so it is not necessary to list them again for you. I have examined an extensive sample of the 2,950 edits you have made since you created this account almost 12 years ago, and also every one of your edits since your recent return to editing after an absence of two years. I found scarcely anything at all which could be regarded as a constructive contribution to the encylopaedia, but I did find much which wasted time of other editors, who could instead have spent the same time on more constructive tasks. I also saw no evidence at all that you have ever learnt anything at all from what has been said to you over the years, and you continue to make exactly the same mistakes that you were told about many years ago. (This inability to learn from what you are told was itself one of the problems which were subject of comment years ago.) In view of the persistent nature of the problems, the fact that nothing seems to be able to get you to change your ways, and the disruption that your editing causes, I have indefinitely blocked you from editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of this page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks before making an unblock request. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:52, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Watson needs to revert his action

Being blocked from all Wikipedia posts including my own talk page is extreme ..and worse Milogardner (talk) 23:20, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]