Difference between revisions of "User talk:Linas"
From Encyclopedia of Mathematics
(About "enough interest") |
(up to 362) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
::Thanks. Finding exactly the right combination of editability, accuracy, peer review, etc. remains elusive. Planet-math is not wiki-like enough; there is no effective way to revise existing articles. And its slow... Scholarpedia seems promising, but for the life of me, I have only been able to log on once, and never again. I guess they have technical problems. Wikipedia can be both marvelous and awful. I still remember the time a college student, preparing for an exam, asked me for help on angular momentum in quantum mechanics. I spent hours fixing up the page; he blanked it because he couldn't understand it, and replaced it with nonsense. I've not the patience. The question will be: can EOM attract enough interest. the "critical mass", to move forward? [[User:Linas|Linas]] 00:16, 2 July 2012 (CEST) | ::Thanks. Finding exactly the right combination of editability, accuracy, peer review, etc. remains elusive. Planet-math is not wiki-like enough; there is no effective way to revise existing articles. And its slow... Scholarpedia seems promising, but for the life of me, I have only been able to log on once, and never again. I guess they have technical problems. Wikipedia can be both marvelous and awful. I still remember the time a college student, preparing for an exam, asked me for help on angular momentum in quantum mechanics. I spent hours fixing up the page; he blanked it because he couldn't understand it, and replaced it with nonsense. I've not the patience. The question will be: can EOM attract enough interest. the "critical mass", to move forward? [[User:Linas|Linas]] 00:16, 2 July 2012 (CEST) | ||
:::About "enough interest": to my satisfaction, we have now 320+ articles viewed 320+ times each [http://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php/Special:PopularPages?limit=11&offset=319], and every month adds about 60 to the number. [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 08:23, 2 July 2012 (CEST) | :::About "enough interest": to my satisfaction, we have now 320+ articles viewed 320+ times each [http://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php/Special:PopularPages?limit=11&offset=319], and every month adds about 60 to the number. [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 08:23, 2 July 2012 (CEST) | ||
| + | ::::Today, [http://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php/Special:PopularPages?limit=11&offset=362 its up to 362]. [[User:Linas|Linas]] 19:51, 22 July 2012 (CEST) | ||
Revision as of 17:51, 22 July 2012
Hi Linas, welcome aboard here. We definitely appreciate contributions by experienced wikipedians! Maybe you will have fun here with mathjax enhancements. --Ulf Rehmann 21:33, 1 July 2012 (CEST)
- Maybe this is indeed a better place for you... :-) --Boris Tsirelson 23:24, 1 July 2012 (CEST)
- Thanks. Finding exactly the right combination of editability, accuracy, peer review, etc. remains elusive. Planet-math is not wiki-like enough; there is no effective way to revise existing articles. And its slow... Scholarpedia seems promising, but for the life of me, I have only been able to log on once, and never again. I guess they have technical problems. Wikipedia can be both marvelous and awful. I still remember the time a college student, preparing for an exam, asked me for help on angular momentum in quantum mechanics. I spent hours fixing up the page; he blanked it because he couldn't understand it, and replaced it with nonsense. I've not the patience. The question will be: can EOM attract enough interest. the "critical mass", to move forward? Linas 00:16, 2 July 2012 (CEST)
- About "enough interest": to my satisfaction, we have now 320+ articles viewed 320+ times each [1], and every month adds about 60 to the number. Boris Tsirelson 08:23, 2 July 2012 (CEST)
- Today, its up to 362. Linas 19:51, 22 July 2012 (CEST)
- About "enough interest": to my satisfaction, we have now 320+ articles viewed 320+ times each [1], and every month adds about 60 to the number. Boris Tsirelson 08:23, 2 July 2012 (CEST)
- Thanks. Finding exactly the right combination of editability, accuracy, peer review, etc. remains elusive. Planet-math is not wiki-like enough; there is no effective way to revise existing articles. And its slow... Scholarpedia seems promising, but for the life of me, I have only been able to log on once, and never again. I guess they have technical problems. Wikipedia can be both marvelous and awful. I still remember the time a college student, preparing for an exam, asked me for help on angular momentum in quantum mechanics. I spent hours fixing up the page; he blanked it because he couldn't understand it, and replaced it with nonsense. I've not the patience. The question will be: can EOM attract enough interest. the "critical mass", to move forward? Linas 00:16, 2 July 2012 (CEST)
How to Cite This Entry:
Linas. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. URL: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Linas&oldid=27174
Linas. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. URL: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Linas&oldid=27174