User talk:Aleksander Stos

Tasks: start a new article • add basic, wanted or requested articles • add definitions • add metadata • edit new pages

Welcome to the Citizendium! We hope you will contribute boldly and well. Here are pointers for a quick start. You'll probably want to know how to get started as an author. Just look at Getting Started for other helpful "startup" links, our help system and CZ:Home for the top menu of community pages. Be sure to stay abreast of events via Twitter. You can test out editing in the sandbox if you'd like. If you need help to get going, the forum is one option. That's also where we discuss policy and proposals. You can ask any administrator for help, too. Just put a note on their "talk" page. Again, welcome and have fun! David Tribe 03:20, 28 February 2007 (CST)

Ahem. A mathematician with wit I see. A very warm welcome indeed to that. David Tribe 05:56, 28 February 2007 (CST)

in computers it MUST be a top subject due to its importance and as part of security I would prefer to see that imoportance reflected in maths as well Robert Tito | Talk 13:49, 2 March 2007 (CST)

more branches on the tree

Hi, by all means - add/cut-off redundancies as much as you can. I stopped only because I have tons of other stuff to do--dlehavi 15:40, 2 March 2007 (CST)

logic

..is unprotected. :-) Stephen Ewen 01:07, 3 March 2007 (CST)

Alex, sending a request to constables@citizendium.org might be faster as we do all have different time zones, and some might be in yours. Robert Tito | Talk 12:44, 3 March 2007 (CST)

imprted topics list from WP

Hi Alex, the lie groups list seems decent. The geometry list seems like a mishmush of redundent, good, dictionary, and I don't know what else.--dlehavi 11:04, 5 March 2007 (CST)

Big O notation

Alex, I see your request to move Big O notation to Big O notation(computer science). Are we looking to make another as well, Big O notation(mathematics)? Do we have a plan for disambiguation for Big O notation or just redirect to Big O notation(computer science). --Matt Innis (Talk) 14:15, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

Now, I propose

• moving "Big O notation" to "Complexity of algorithms" (would appreciate comments from computer workgroup members). Just look at "see also" section at the bottom the article - "complexity theory" is where it really belongs in.
• deleting the resulting redirect "Big O notation". This will be something different.

Okay, if I move this to Complexity of algorithms, would you be the one to clean it up, or do we need to get a computer science member involved now? --Matt Innis (Talk) 17:05, 25 March 2007 (CDT)

As you are a math author, would you consider discussing one of these two guys to see if they have a problem with your idea. If they don't respond, I will go with your suggestion for Big O. Then I will ask User:Robert Tito as a computer science editor to join us in the discussion for the Complexity of algorithms. Sound good? --Matt Innis (Talk) 08:13, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

Okay, Robert, meet us on my talk page as well. --Matt Innis (Talk) 08:51, 26 March 2007 (CDT) Big O is a standard way to solve equations in physics and chemistry by approximation. So only computers or mathematics will not suffice. Robert Tito |  Talk  12:13, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

AlekStos, I performed the move to Complexity of algorithms and deleted the redirect from Big O notation though I suppose you could have done that. Do please, add some content befoer someone nominates it for deletion in any cleanup function! Thanks for you patience in making sure everyone was on the same page. --Matt Innis (Talk) 12:41, 26 March 2007 (CDT)