User talk:LC~enwiki

Hi, Could you recommend any further reading on the Raven Paradox? I'm an electrical engineer but ny knowledge of formal logic (that isnt boolean) is light.--Socrates6 (talk) 19:13, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LC, I left a question for you at Talk:NP-Hard. AxelBoldt 22:01 Dec 18, 2002 (UTC)

Another issue came up at Talk:EXPTIME. AxelBoldt 18:59 Feb 9, 2003 (UTC)

please see

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Inactive1

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:

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:

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| talk)

Formula for primes

(I left the following comment on another editor's page, not realizing you added the formula originally) Please see the Talk page, where another editor has removed your formula for primes. I tested it, and it seemed to work, but we both agree that a source would be good for the information. My quick check of the web didn't provide any results, and I was hoping you had a source to use. Actually it doesn't seem too hard to prove, but I think wikipedia's policy on original research would disqualify that. So, how 'bout it? Care to dig up the 'ol number theory books? — vijay (Talk) 01:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's now a proof on Talk:Formula for primes. —Lowellian (reply) 04:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's Expert Peer Review process (or lack of such) for Science related articles

Hi - I posted the section with the same name on my talk page. Could you take part in discussion ? Thanks ARP Apovolot (talk) 21:26, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your user talk page

Hi LC, I found your user talk page while checking out some old edits. I have history merged it, so all edits are now in one place. Hope you don't mind. Graham87 12:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suspension of admin privileges due to inactivity

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 21:47, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Like Newyorkbrad, I am thrilled that one of our earliest contributors may have returned - but as indicated above, bureaucrats must be reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised prior to undertaking a resysop request. Is there anyone still active who might be able to confirm your identity? Also - could log in from your home internet connection to certify your request? –xeno^talk 02:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- As an FYI, your request was closed without action, pending your return and response to the unanswered queries. –xeno^talk 18:23, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called LC. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name LC~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

01:15, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

15:13, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society

Dear LC~enwiki,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more.

Best regards, Urhixidur (talk) 16:51, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]