User talk:Sigma 7

Welcome, Sigma 7!

Come introduce yourself at the new users page. If you have any questions, you can ask there or contact me personally.-- SB_Johnny  talk 14:13, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

WB:SPEEDY
I deleted that page as it falls under the speedy deletion policy. I think the link in the print version must be incorrect, since I can't see it linked or transcluded either. &mdash; Mike.lifeguard &#124; talk 22:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help...
Great work helping to complete the C Standard Library of the C++ Programming book, I was using (and requested permission for it) the content of http://www.cppreference.com/ now wikified as http://www.cppreference.com/wiki/ (but still missing some of the old content, check the web.archive). Thanks also for preserving and using the same format of all the content already copied... --Panic (talk) 22:16, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Clarification on JavaScript/Operators and Expressions
Hi Sigma,

I've noticed you hard work on tagging pages. Before deleting it, I wanted to ask you whether JavaScript/Operators and Expressions had actually been merged, or is just similar or redundant? If there's been a merge, we should merge the page histories. Cheers, --Swift (talk) 06:29, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I did take some content from that page earlier to fill in some gaps within JavaScript/Operators (although I discovered that I missed a few.) If you feel a history merge is appropriate, go for it. --Sigma 7 (talk) 17:09, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Done. I've left the redirect, even though it isn't used in the book, because there might be external links to it. I'll leave it to you to decide if it's still be useful. --Swift (talk) 01:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Query notices
Oh, one more thing: Maybe you usually do and I just happened to notice the one time it slipped your mind, but when tagging pages with the query template, please consider notifying the users with the markup provided on the tag. Since query is for pages where it's unclear whether they would grow into a keep or delete, it would help ease the minds of those deleting the page if reasonable attempts to notify the contributor have been made. New users don't necessarily use their watch-list and might have just gotten side-tracked reading up on Wikibooks, forgetting their new creation. --Swift (talk) 06:37, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

C++ Programming/Operators Table
Can it be improved? If not the old version seems better (less color and boxes), some lines would be fine but that would require a major reshuffle of the data... --Panic (talk) 06:23, 5 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The main issue I found with the table was that there were separate rows for effectively the same operator. I think I got mose of those.
 * With table formatting, I feel it's sometimes better to 'contain' a table inside of a border, since it indicates that it is it's own segment within a piece of text, and seems to be a standard method of setting up some tables (in this case, it uses the wikitable class.) I have two comparision revisions, which use original and modified formatting respectively; the newer one feels a bit more structured in my opinion.  (It's also a bit smaller, which is odd since the markup indicates there should be cellspacing of 5.) --Sigma 7 (talk) 03:25, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yup that was basically why I prefer the old view it is easier to read (and to print even if it gets broken across pages, it could be improved with some lines as I said above) and doesn't place to much emphasis on what type of operator it is, this sort of list is useful to check for a specific operator not a type (probably removing the color tabs on the middle of the table and use bold letterings)...
 * Well that is my opinion. Consider what I said and how people will use it. I'm a firm adherent to "less is more..." on content/visual aids if the purpose can be similarly satisfied. In this case it got flashier but removed some usability. --Panic (talk) 04:28, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Foundations of Edu. and Instructional Assessment
Hello Signma 7,

I am an instructor for the course that builds this book each semester. I noticed that you undid and edit by one of our students, who removed all of her content from the page Foundations of Education and Instructional Assessment/Edition 4/Foundations Table of Contents/Chapter 7/7.1.4. I am sure that you have no ill intentions. This book is written and constructed by students in our course. Sometimes they remove information because they are learning and not as familiar with the wikibook process. This student decided to write on a new topic and so deleted her work on this page. In the future could you please contact me if you have a question regarding our book. Thank you very much for your assistance. Jkauf007 (talk) 15:37, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Rollbacker
Hi Sigma 7,

I made you a rollbacker and threw in patroller for good measure. If you don't want patroller, I can undo that for you. --Jomegat (talk) 20:56, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

How to use a Bullworker
Hello. I noticed you tagged the work as potentially copyright. Could you help me out in finding out what the license is, please? I've just pinged GFK's forums, just have to wait for an activation e-mail.--Launchballer (talk) 15:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC) Requested copyright here--Launchballer (talk) 16:01, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

The example “custom dialog edit record” doesn't work on tk8.5
In page "http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Tcl_Programming/Tk#Example:_a_tiny_IRC_client" The example “custom dialog edit record” doesn't work on tk8.5. It generate an error when executing the “get” command on line #28 "" {lappend res [$w.e$n get]} please upgrade it. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.76.8.170 (discuss • contribs) 08:31, 12 June 2010
 * Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikibooks is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikibooks community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). --Sigma 7 (talk) 14:07, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on Algebra
The mistake on the distributive property for Algebra is embarrassing. I am trying to think in several dimensions for my work on the book (audience, simplicity, mathematical integrity) and have found that laying down text in situ leads to editing mistakes. I saw how to create a sandbox from your user page and am working on a page for completing the square in my sandbox.

It you have some ideas on how the Algebra book should flow please leave them on the discussion page for the book.

Thanks again,

Nfgdayton (talk) 15:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Just to with you luck on the Compiler Construction fix...
I really wish you the best on that project, I did a small attempt but due to the type of vandalism going on that at times did introduce valid content but at other times as you comment seemed word salad (even if on subject) I had to drop making anything about it or even police it as it would require more cognitive effort than I was willing to spend on it... If you manage to find someone that can attribute some blame consider requesting a block from the administration, if you need any help just ask... --Panic (discuss • contribs) 15:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Your revert on Non-Programmer's_Tutorial_for_Python_3/Decisions
That example was change because it didn't work as described in Python 3.3. The version I replaced it with does actually work as described, yes the printed text is a bit goofy, however, the printed text is easily changable. The code is what mattered. In the future, please don't blindly revert (FYI -  I'm new here, but I'm a 5 year en:wikipedia editor  :) TheKwizatsHaderach (discuss • contribs) 13:01, 14 May 2013 (UTC)


 * About the change:
 * The old version works fine on Python 3.3. See http://pastebin.com/QZfzCAAJ
 * The new version doesn't follow the exercise in question. In particular, it's supposed to continue until the user guesses correctly, then react to whether or not it took more than three guesses.
 * The new version has a pass and failure condition at the same time. See http://pastebin.com/Yb4cRU0q
 * The only faulty version of the program was found on the talk page, where the user incorrectly transcribed a comparison symbol. --Sigma 7 (discuss • contribs) 16:16, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 21:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)