Help:Questions

How Do I...  Please post site related problems on the  main talk page. i.e. Things not working as they should.

[Answered] Eqn template
Just a note.

The delimiter $|$ doesn't seem to be valid in the eqn template, so I used \vert instead, but this behaves pretty weirdly, e.g.

is fine, but

is not.

Argh, also this:

{{eqn|l= |o=\leq |r= \frac{ \left\vert { a_n } \right\vert }{ n^{\sigma_0} } {{eqn|l= |o= = |r= \left\vert { \frac{a_n}{ n^{s_0} } } \right\vert

can't make it work at all. Linus44


 * Placing two }'s side-by-side will prematurely close {{eqn}} template. This has been a topic of discussion on the main page ... we're still looking for a fix. --Joe (talk) 15:23, 15 February 2011 (CST)


 * Ok, thanks Linus44 15:30, 15 February 2011 (CST)


 * You missed some closing braces

{{eqn|l= |o=\leq |r= \frac{ \left\vert { a_n } \right\vert }{ n^{\sigma_0} } }} {{eqn|l= |o= = |r= \left\vert { \frac{a_n}{ n^{s_0} } } \right\vert }}

{{eqn|l= \left\vert { \frac{a_n}{ n^s } } \right\vert |o= = |r= \frac{ \left\vert { a_n } \right\vert }{ n^\sigma } }} {{eqn|l= |o=\leq |r= \frac{ \left\vert { a_n } \right\vert }{ n^{\sigma_0} } }} <-- here {{eqn|l= |o= = |r= \left\vert { \frac{a_n}{ n^{s_0} } } \right\vert }} <-- and here {{end-eqn}} --Joe (talk) 15:32, 15 February 2011 (CST)


 * I tried 4 times to add the same reply but I kept getting a midair collision. Stroll on. --prime mover 15:35, 15 February 2011 (CST)

How do you post something on a discussion page?
How do you post something on a discussion page? --1is0? May 4, 2013


 * By pressing the link at the top of the page that says "Discussion". If it's blue, it means there's already such a page, to which you are welcome to add material. If it's red, then the page does not yet exist because nobody has posted anything to it yet. Your contribution will then be the first on that page. --prime mover (talk) 22:58, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Does the site have a standard quantifier convention?
For unbounded quantification, I've seen $$\forall x:\forall y:\exists a :(\dots)$$ when I would have written simply $$\forall x\forall y\exists a(\dots)$$

For bounded quantification, I've seen something similar (use of colons). However, I would simply write the quantification without the colons. --Robertbiggs34 (talk) 19:26, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, when using bounded quantification and using the same quantifier over the same set (i.e. $$ \forall x\in \R \,\forall y\in\R$$) do we shorten this to $$\forall x,y\in\R$$ or $$\forall x.y\in\R$$? --Robertbiggs34 (talk) 19:30, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * We use commas. I am not the style master here, so I can't answer the rest too well. I don't think colons should be needed between quantifiers, at least for unbounded quantification, but Prime.mover would be the one to answer definitively. --Dfeuer (talk) 19:33, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * $\forall x: \forall y: \exists a : \left({\ldots}\right)$ is the convention, consistent with colon meaning (loosely) "such that".


 * It's also $\forall x, y \in \R$ which is consistent with comma being used to separate entities in a list. I've never seen a dot used in this context, it looks perverse to me.


 * What we don't sanction is the use of a comma to mean "such that", so when we see $\forall x \in S, P \left({x}\right)$ we immediately change it to $\forall x \in S: P \left({x}\right)$, and so on.


 * Commas are probably the most ill-used punctuation mark in natural language as well as mathematics, so it's something we're used to.


 * Incidentally, please use dollar-sign delimiters instead of because the latter are not fully supported by MathJax (and dollars are more compact and quicker to type than the alternatives). --prime mover (talk) 19:42, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Vector Space Axioms is a good illustration of PW style. --GFauxPas (talk) 20:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Is it possible to download your definitions as a data file?
There are a lot of technical definitions here that would be great for inclusion (with attribution, of course) in the multilingual dictionary at http://kamusigold.org. Is there any way to siphon them in one go?
 * Interesting and ambitious concept. There is an "Export Pages" tool which lives under Special pages (see LH menu). It compromises the capabilities of anyone else to use the database while it's happening though, because of the load on the application, so try not to do this often. --prime mover (talk) 13:01, 27 September 2016 (EDT)
 * Thanks. I tried with the top level for the Definitions category, and got back a beautiful xml page that will be a snap to parse. However, there are a ton of sub-categories and sub-subs and sub-sub-subs, which are not captured in the top level export. By my count, there are close to 750 definition categories (many with only one member) - downloading them one at a time would be a mission. Might there be a way to consolidate the task?
 * I would happily run this at 6am Europe/ 9pm Pacific. In my experience with web traffic, that's when the web's circadian rhythms hit bottom.


 * We used to do a daily xml dump of the whole site. I can re-enable it if it would help. You should be able to just fetch it and parse out the definitions. --Joe (talk)


 * That would be great. Please let me know the whens and wheres, and I'll do a one-time fetch. Maybe come back about once a year to see what's new, but this certainly won't be something we are running daily. --Malangali (talk) 03:33, 30 September 2016 (EDT)
 * You can get the latest dump here. Let me know if it suits your needs. --Joe (talk) 16:38, 3 October 2016 (EDT)
 * That's fantastic. I've downloaded the dump, read through it, and know how we'll parse it. Now putting it into the workflow queue... Many thanks! Malangali (talk) 11:19, 5 October 2016 (EDT)