User talk:Boruch Baum

Welcome to my talk page

Hello! I find it easier to follow a conversation if it's in one place. Therefore:

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, linking to me ({{notified .


If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Once I've left a message on your talk page, I'll generally know if you've responded there even without the "reply to" because I will have

watchlisted

you. However, some automated messages, like the ones for speedy deletion, don't add the addressee to the sender's watchlist. Also, if I'm away for a few days, my watchlist may not go back far enough for me to see your reply.

List of kosher restaurants

Noting here that I've contested the speedy deletion request of this article; it's merely a list with a neutral lead section.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:55, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@
noteworthy of an encyclopedia
.

If what you did was to just remove the tag, the thing to do is to restore it, and after saving the page, click on the button that says "Contest this speedy deletion". OTOH, if that's what you did, I'll need help finding where your discussion input was put.

—Boruch Baum (talk) 10:44, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

G11 is only for spam-like stuff and promotional stuff. List articles are not inherently advertising, much less blatant advertising. I did remove the deletion tag, which is the usual way for non-page creator editors to contest a speedy deletion. Concerns about an article violating

WP:NOT are adjudicated at WP:Articles for deletion; speedy deletion only handles a few very specific cases of such. Does this help?Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:50, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Understood. Why, though, then, do the instructions ask you to click on the button that says "Contest this speedy deletion"?

The substance of your response is off-point, though, because all you are doing is making a generalised statement "list articles are not inherently advertising", without addressing the truth (my truth? my opinion? my contention?) that this particular list certainly is blatant advertising.

Are you advising me to continue by adjudicating using the WP:Articles for deletion process?

—Boruch Baum (talk) 11:13, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That button is there for the page creating editor; speedy deletion requests are generally contested by the page creator but we prefer them not to remove the tags themselves due to the conflict of interest. Yes, the discussion needs to continue in an AfD.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Overlinking

Hi Boruch, thanks for your work. Just a reminder that we don't usually link years, dates, or (many more well-known) country-names. Tony (talk) 08:08, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

History of the Jews in Bulgaria

Hi, I am not sure what I did wrong in the references. Could you explain it to me? Thanks in advance. Amusecuiop (talk) 22:15, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Amusecuiop: - I responded to you on the pre-existing thread on your own talk page.

Reference errors on 21 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Seder Olam Zutta page, your edit caused a duplicate page number error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a

false positive, you can report it to my operator

. Thanks,

talk) 00:42, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Cheryl Lehman

Could you please take a look at the page, to see if notability issues are being satisfactorily addressed now. Dreadarthur (talk) 01:03, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dreadarthur: Done! I responded in detail on the article's talk page. —Boruch Baum (talk) 06:45, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your detailed comments. Have to do more. She is notable, as are many accounting academics not yet the subject of Wikipedia profiles. Not everybody is Joel Demski, but they are nonetheless notable within the discipline, and across disciplines. Need to better prove this, within the constraints of my time elsewhere. Dreadarthur (talk) 03:02, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

December 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Office of Foreign Assets Control 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:

ofac/sdn/prgrmlst.txt|title=SDN BY PROGRAMS|year=2006|publisher=treasury.gov|quote=GO CUBA PLUS (a.k.a. T&M INTERNATIONAL LTD.; a.k.a. TOUR & MARKETING INTERNATIONAL LTD. ...|accessdate=
| style="vertical-align: top;" | ''Narcotics related''<ref>"<Narcotics Trafficking"</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow

talk) 01:25, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Proper mathematical notation

Hello.

You wrote the following:

{\frac {sin(x)}{x}}=1-{\frac {x^{2}}{3!}}+{\frac {x^{4}}{5!}}-{\frac {x^{6}}{7!}}+\cdots .

Formerly the article had said this:

{\frac {\sin(x)}{x}}=1-{\frac {x^{2}}{3!}}+{\frac {x^{4}}{5!}}-{\frac {x^{6}}{7!}}+\cdots .

I might have written it as follows:

{\frac {\sin x}{x}}=1-{\frac {x^{2}}{3!}}+{\frac {x^{4}}{5!}}-{\frac {x^{6}}{7!}}+\cdots .

Using the backslash in "\sin x" has at least two effects: (1) It prevents italicization of "sin", and (2) it results in proper spacing before and after "sin" in expressions like this:

a\sin b\,

I think it may also effect the size of the letters in some situations -- for example when "sin x" appears in a subscript, but I'm not sure about that last.

When you write "sin x" with no backslash, then it looks like this:

sinx\,

There is no spacing between "sin" and "x" despite the blank space in the code.

Using \sin with the backslash in the code is standard usage in TeX, LaTex, MathJax, and Wikipedia's TeX-like system for mathematical notation.

Morover, you wrote {{{sin(x)}}} where {sin(x)} would have the same effect. The extra {curly} braces are just clutter and may get in the way of editing and mislead people about good coding of mathematical notation. See

WP:MOSMATH and the pages to which it links for more about this. Michael Hardy (talk) 17:58, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

@

talk · contribs) on Talk:Basel problem#Formatting per WP:MSM and WP:MOSMATH#Multi-letter names, it was suggested to me that the issue might be my browser (firefox v42.0) and not the formatting of the web page. Do you also not have any unusual vertical whitespace when using tex trig functions in fractions? —Boruch Baum (talk) 18:40, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

I have no such problem. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:21, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

Regarding your edit at tractate, please be warned that if you insist on making factually incorrect edits and edit warring, you will be reported. Debresser (talk) 01:58, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Debresser: Not only is the edit factually correct, but it will be very helpful to most readers, so I most certainly am restoring it, and you are quite welcome to "report", but please first calmly consider to what you are objecting: referring to a text (and only secondarily, in parentheses) by its most commonly known name.

Secondarily, may I ask: Are you stalking me? Are you doing so on the background of my edits to the Chabad page? Can I expect more of the same of all my other Wikipedia contributions? If in your heart the answer to any of those questions is yes, or even maybe, reconsider.

—Boruch Baum (talk) 02:08, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See the talkpage there, where I explain why you are wrong. On a sidenote, if you don't know your stuff, don't pretend you do. Debresser (talk) 03:11, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Boruch Baum, I'm having the same issue your having with debresser. I've added my name to your complaint. Let's coordinate on this. Here is my complaint: Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests Two Editors Using Disruptive Editing and Ad Hominem Attacks Lokshin kugel (talk) 05:27, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-Warring

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:29, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1066 Granada massacre

Talk:1066_Granada_massacre

Do you have an opinion on my proposed changed to the wording?

Spacecowboy420 (talk) 11:49, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Your e-mail

Well, as you can see, I'm not a prompt e-mail checker. I apologize for the delay. In the event you haven't found your answer already, check out this page:

Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace. There are many useful templates, not just warnings, there that you can copy and paste to the relevant location. Let me know if you need more info. Regards Tiderolls 14:13, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Your draft article, Draft:Andrew Penson

Hello, Boruch Baum. It has been over six months since you last edited your

Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Andrew Penson

".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia

mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission

and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at

this link

. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Azealia911

_talk 08:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Surgut

Hi, you are not German right? It is a German word (Baum = tree), ok than I have do write in English :D

You thanked me for the Surgut-2-Power-Plant edit (its the largest gas-fired power plant in the world), but I forgot about Surgut-1, it is the 3rd largest oil fired power plant in the world.

The Surgut-1 Power Station (Russian: Сургутская ГРЭС-1) is the third largest oil-fired power station in the world, at an installed capacity of 3,268 MW.

The power station is located in Surgut, Russia. The facility began operations in February 1972.

On 28 June 2011, a gas explosion occurred at the power station. At least 12 people were injured.

Can I add it too? I guess Surgut-1 and Surgut-2 are generating power for a radius of more than 1,000 kilometers since Surgut only has around ~300,000 population! Except the Surgut-2 gas-fired plant also provides thermal energy (hot water for heating) to the town, but in Russia this is done by natural Gas seperated by Gazprom? Greetigs Kilon22 (talk) 12:59, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Celestial longitude

I have posted a comment on Talk:Celestial longitude#Content of this article that you might want to read. Iceblock (talk) 19:44, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016
: Voting now open!

Hello, Boruch Baum. 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

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]