User talk:Temperal


Sign yourself with four tildes please. That looks like this: ~~~~ Also, be polite, have good faith, don't bite me, literally or figuratively, all that good stuff. Also, note that if you leave a message here, I will reply here, not on your user talk page. However, if I leave a message on your user page and you respond here, I will continue to respond on your user page. Temperalxy 19:37, 20 October 2007 (EDT)

Leave a message!


Hi again,

I notice you have been un-capitalizing many pages' titles. I think, though, that the precedent is to capitalize the titles of articles about specific theorems (see here). This is different from Wikipedia's convention, but there you are.

Cheers, Boy Soprano II 00:00, 16 December 2007 (EST)

You're certainly welcome to your opinion, but this was decided in the thread that Boy Soprano links to. (I don't care much either way, but if the point of a wiki is to reach a consensus of some type ...) --JBL 11:53, 17 December 2007 (EST)

Red links on Zorn's Lemma Page


Why did you remove the links to the not-yet-existant pages for the Axiom of Choice and the Well-Ordering Theorem on the Zorn's Lemma article? They inform the unknowing reader that these are related topics, and might prompt the knowing reader to write articles on them. —Boy Soprano II 17:45, 25 November 2007 (EST)

(In response to your reply on my talk page) I respectfully disagree. The Axiom of Choice, is a controversial topic which, in my opinion, deserves more attention than it should receive in an article about Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory in general. However, I will concede the point, at least while nobody has written an article about it on this wiki. But the well-ordering theorem is a nontrivial result which, for one thing, extends the concept of induction to any set, regardless of size, and which, as far as I can tell, is not discussed anywhere on the wiki, certainly not on the page about the Zermelo-Fraenkel Axioms. If you are really in doubt as to whether these are substantial topics, I suggest you look here and here.

I hope we can come to an agreement soon,
Boy Soprano II 23:35, 25 November 2007 (EST)

Re: Thanks; I'm glad we're closer to agremeent now. —Boy Soprano II 20:20, 2 December 2007 (EST)


Sorry, couldn’t resist answering your question. JS is disabled on the AoPSWiki (it seems that you’re from Wikipedia; the monobook.js file doesn’t work here). Apparently there’s a loophole with enabling JS which would allow users to steal each others passwords - see AoPSWiki:Discussion#monobook.js. If using <script> tags would work, then it would be a security flaw. Azjps (talk) 16:09, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

XP Math Article

OK, I decided that the XP math article was fine. Sorry for being rude; I wasn't thinking straight then. Don't make it an advertisement though. --solafidefarms 20:51, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Oh, and I don't know what an advertisement is either here...--solafidefarms 21:57, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

Templates and Formatting

(Re) Special:Prefixindex provides all of the templates. There aren’t too many anyways, since this wiki is relatively new. Btw, the incorrect syntax on my userpage was just a [really bad] joke; thanks nevertheless for your attentiveness.
I think the reason nothing is happening on your userpage is because the <div> tags are inside of the <table> tags but outside of the <tr> tags. Haven’t tested though, so I’m not positive. Azjps (talk) 18:19, 11 April 2007 (EDT)
Take a look at Special:Statistics (2nd section) and you’ll see what I mean. Azjps (talk) 15:18, 13 April 2007 (EDT)


I was worrying about license also, but I didn't really stop to think about the consequences of copying some pictures licensed under the GPL would have. (I really wish somebody would created AoPSWiki:Copyright to give a more explicit definition of what is allowed, the forum sticky related to the topic leaves us trailing with "a documentation license will be decided upon later") And unfortunately my knowledge about copyrights and such is terrible, though I wasn’t as concerned about this particular case since it didn’t seem to be related to the direct purpose of the AoPSWiki …

I guess if it turns out that it’s not allowed, I can go through and rewrite the template from scratch (which I believe is allowed). In the meantime though, I don’t know what to do with the images uploaded .. most are just solid colored and are easily re-creatable, so I guess they won’t be that much of a problem? Azjps (talk) 21:53, 17 September 2007 (EDT)

Never mind, I rewrote the code anyway. It actually turned out to be quite easy (just a 9 by 9 table and a lot of copy+pasting). By the way, the [edit] links don’t appear to be scrolling when I scroll down your user talk page, so I can’t seem to edit the section directly. Azjps (talk) 16:19, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
I use IE 6 (perhaps I should upgrade). It could just be the browser, since a lot of things appear to be displaced when I view certain pages (A:D#Math on the page is horribly garbled). Azjps (talk) 16:29, 18 September 2007 (EDT)
Now that the format has changed, the problem has gone away! Azjps (talk) 18:46, 19 September 2007 (EDT)


ok this works -this message was left unsigned by User:anirudh


I discovered the resources page by accident via Google :D. Here it is. Azjps (talk) 14:34, 8 October 2007 (EDT)

  • I don't know if you noticed already but there seem to be a couple of typos with the competition problems. Azjps (talk) 19:00, 12 October 2007 (EDT)

IMO 2007, Problem 3

Hi, what was the problem with the solution I have posted?

Jff 08:26, 29 October 2007 (EDT)

I am one of the authors, so copyright is not a problem. And the document has many unconventional notations that are our own LaTeX macros. I don't really have time to copy and paste the document and I think the link would be useful.

Jff 20:08, 29 October 2007 (EDT)


Yeah, that's me. Except I haven’t been active on Wikipedia for a really long time (so long, in fact that somebody hacked my account and deleted the main page with it once). Azjps (talk) 22:56, 24 November 2007 (EST)

  • Heh, thanks. Actually standards for RfAs have gone up a bit since last year (I think at least), or usually somebody will post an opposite vote for some random reason. Azjps (talk) 20:23, 26 November 2007 (EST)

Complex Numbers

I'm curious as to why you deleted those categories with complex numbers. The categories are there to group questions together of similar content, so what's wrong with it being a bit specific? Azjps (talk) 15:45, 1 December 2007 (EST)

Actually, never mind, I noticed you put all of the related problems onto the Complex number article. Azjps (talk) 15:46, 1 December 2007 (EST)
I wouldn't actually mind having all of those categories (it makes it easier to directly find problems on a specific subject), but I suppose it would get difficult to manage. Thanks, Azjps (talk) 15:53, 1 December 2007 (EST)

I do think though that the AMC 10 redirects should stay in place. It makes it twice as difficult to make changes to solutions for the same problem. Azjps (talk) 21:06, 1 December 2007 (EST)

I see, I will do so. Azjps (talk) 21:24, 1 December 2007 (EST)

Page day 2

I hoped somebody would revive this (I had even considered doing so myself). Quality over quantity, as you mentioned, is definitely good advice; otherwise unfortunately I can't come up with any general advice except those posted for day 1. Good luck with your idea, Azjps (talk) 12:10, 13 January 2008 (EST)

User:Temperal/Main Page

I am currently trying to get the number of pages that link to (AoPSWiki tutorial) down to one(Main Page), since it redirects to (AoPSWiki:Tutorial). Could you edit (User:Temperal/Main Page) please? Thank you. --1=2 08:05, 6 February 2008 (EST)


Is there any way to make two different versions of the page Integral, one meant for those who are learning calculus for the first time (the current version) and one for slightly more advanced readers (possibly including Reimann, Reimann-Stieltjes integrals etc.)? Also what are other's opinions on this? (I am new to the wiki and wanted advice)

Shreyas patankar 09:51, 15 February 2008 (EST)

Your epic fail at AMC 10

It is impossible to get a 136 on the AMC 10.

Proof: Each score is in the form $s=6a+1.5b+0c$, where $a$ is the number of questions you got right, $b$ is the number of questions you left blank, and $c$ is the number of questions you got wrong. You multiply both sides by 2 to get $2s=12a+3b$, therefore $s=\dfrac{3(4a+b)}{2}$, and thus each score is 1/2 of a multiple of 3. $136\cdot 2=272$, $\dfrac{272}{3}=90+\dfrac{2}{3}$, which is not an integer. Therefore, you can not get a 136 on the AMC 10.

Did you mean that you got a 135 or 136.5?

136.5. Temperalxy 01:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


I think that it is taking up space, because the wikify template is much better for the same use. Could you please delete? Thanks! --1=2 14:04, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure; done. Temperal 14:07, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Invalid username
Login to AoPS