User talk:Karl Palmen
|
|
Hello there Karl, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page and experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump. Nice work on the calendar entries. Cheers! --maveric149
Thanks for your correction to the Persian calendar page. I have a question that I thought you may know the answer. From the etymology of September through December, it is clear that they denote 7 through 10. Do you know if this is because at one point the start of the year was March (and possibly the dary of veneral equinox) or not? If so, do you know if the Gregorian calendar is based on the Persian calendar or not? A friend of mine a long time ago told me this was the case, but I could not solidly varify it for myself. But on the other hand, I don't know how else to explain the ordinal discrepancy of Sept. Through Dec. either. Regards, --Keyvan 11:09 Apr 1, 2003 (UTC)
All I know is that March was originally the first month of the Roman year and that February and January were subsequently added as explained in Roman calendar -- Karl Palmen
After your edit on power of two, to "tidy the format list", it appears misaligned. At least in my browser, and the same if I copy the text into a text editor. Is there a logical explanation for this? :-) Fredrik 11:07, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC).
I can see that the problem may arise from the '?' symbol inserted for missing links 128 and 256. A space will need inserting after each such number if either its page is written or its link is removed. I now realise the table will appear misaligned if the viewer is not logged on, because missing links are highlighted in red rather than followed by a question mark.
- -) User:Karl Palmen 4 Mar 2004
- Ah. Well, I removed the missing links so it look fine either way now. Fredrik 12:37, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
| Contents |
Guess what??
256 now has a page of its own at Wikipedia. If you know anything not mentioned in that article, you are free to expand it.
Centered square number
I replied to your comment at Talk:Centered square number. PrimeFan 21:05, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
- Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
- Multi-Licensing Guide
- Free the Rambot Articles Project
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:
- Option 1
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
OR
- Option 2
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)| talk)
Strictly non-palindromic #s
- That's right, it is palindromic in base 738. But it's not palindromic in binary, hexadecimal, or any base up to base 737. No integer is completely non-palindromic (n is always palindromic in base n - 1 if nothing else), and the name "strictly non-palindromic" might not be the clearest, but "n is not palindromic in any base b with 2 <= b <= n-2" is a little cumbersome. (Both of these terms are taken from Template:OEIS. PrimeFan 17:53, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
Strictly non-palindromic numbers. Karl Palmen - 5 May 2002.
Hi
Hello, I wondering if you could help me, Iv been looking on wikipedia for some info on high school diplomas. But I cant find any. Could you please help? Thanks! --GoldFer 12:09, 5 May 2005 (UTC)