Hello, 3142, 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:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place ((help me)) before the question. Again, welcome! Presidentman talk · contribs Random Picture of the Day (Talkback) 23:16, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding of the clause "If page A has subsequently been edited" in WP:Moving a page#Undoing a move implies that your reversion didn't help, because the mere presence of additional revisions on the redirect would have required ((db-move)) to be used anyway. Correct me if I'm wrong (I probably am...)

Do you agree with the specific categorization, and is it okay for me to re-revert if the move request fails? --SoledadKabocha (talk) 18:31, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I hadn't seen that another user had already re-reverted. I guess that makes this a moot point. --SoledadKabocha (talk) 18:37, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you re-open my nom, please? Tenebris' objections, though persistent, are baseless. The meaning of my blurb and Bellemora's altblurb is virtually identical, although hers is clearer and I support it. AlexTiefling (talk) 08:58, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't read Tenebris as objecting to your nom, I did because he hasn't abdicated, making the nomination untrue. Correction to something that is true makes it a different story than was originally nominated, and consequently very difficult to unravel what the intent of any particular editor was. I'm generally supportive of posting a story here but it has to be accurate and short cuts are not appropriate for thing that will end up on the front page. 3142 (talk) 09:14, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My nomination did not say he had abdicated. I spent most of yesterday reverting people adding that claim to other articles. My nomination said that he 'is to abdicate'. That is not the same as 'has abdicated'. Do you understand that? AlexTiefling (talk) 09:21, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 3142. You have new messages at 331dot's talk page.
Message added 10:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.[reply]

331dot (talk) 10:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Circa 3 years ago you added a ^{[failed verification]} tag to the Systolic array page.

The original statement read "Systolic arrays were invented by Richard P. Brent and H. T. Kung, who developed them to compute greatest common divisors of integers and polynomials.[1][failed verification]"

Current formulation is "Early applications include computing greatest common divisors of integers and polynomials.[1][failed verification]"

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but after briefly familiarizing myself with the mentioned source, I get the impression that the current statement no longer needs the ^{[failed verification]} tag. If you agree, please remove the tag. I would prefer to remove it myself instead of bothering you with it, but there may be something I've missed and the tag still applies. 213.175.41.130 (talk) 12:34, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]