User talk:RobertHannah89

Idea on cryptography: SHA-1: 565fad72ba349d697a69e9f6c12e6e5a9ed078e9RobertHannah89 (talk) 04:21, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, RobertHannah89! I am DaGizza and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for your contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check out Wikipedia:Questions, or feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome!

Gizza^Discuss ^© 12:45, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming articles (ie. "moving" them)[edit]

Hi. As the link WP:AUTOCONFIRM describes you should be able to rename whichever article you wish except for an extreme minority of articles which are protected. WP:MOVE describes the process in further detail. If you are using the new beta version of Wikipedia just like me, then you click on the down arrow near the "History" sign at the top of the screen and then choose the "Move" option. It will ask you what you want the article to be renamed as and you can justify why you are changing the article's name in a box just like in normal editing. Feel free to ask any question you like. There is also a Help Desk where you can post questions and experienced users will respond to them ASAP. Gizza^Discuss ^© 12:59, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I renamed all three of them. Only one of them seemed to be problematic (PRF) because it required deleting the redirect first. I've noticed that someone has tagged a couple of the article with "insufficient context". The only suggestion I can think of is perhaps adding an introductory sentence referring to the parent concepts of Advantage and cryptography in each of them. But you can whoever added those tags on their talk page. Go to "History" at the top and then you will find a link to the user's talk page (in fact you will find links to anyone who has edited the article).

Oh and you can bother me as much as you like. I'm very free in terms of Wiki these days. :) Gizza^Discuss ^© 02:27, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Few Questions[edit]

I have never seen anyone with the pie chart on their user page itself. The closest thing I have seen is a link to the edit count and contributions statistics. I don't think it is possible to include an automatically updating pie chart.
I haven't used citations for a long time now so you will get a much better response on the WT:CITE discussion page. This is quite an active discussion page so I'm sure you will get a response within a day or so.
Not quite sure if this answers your last question but you can add a specific in-line tag to a unreferenced sentence using the {{Citation needed}} or {{Cn}} template. If you want tag the entire article or section as lacking citations you can add the {{Unreferenced}} or {{Unreferenced section}} templates respectively. Template:Unreferenced describes additional parameters you can add to the tag (like since when the tag has been added, etc.) If an article is partially but not sufficiently referenced there is a template {{Refimprove}} which can be used.
But I'm not sure if this is what you're asking. If you're talking about the laborious task of adding these tags to every sentence then there may be automated tools that help you (though I cannot guarantee it). There are heaps of "gadgets" or tools that automate things and facilitate doing certain tasks on Wiki. Go to "My Preferences" and then click on "Gadgets" located at the right end. I'm not familiar with all of them but perhaps "Reftools" and "Provelt" are of use to you. Clicking on the links should give you a better idea of what they are about. Gizza^Discuss ^© 00:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

organizing an article[edit]

Hello.

Please notice my edits to trapping region. The phrase "Given a dynamical system..." is not a very good way to start a Wikipedia article. It doesn't tell the lay reader that applied mathematics is what it's about.

Also, linking to compact is silly. Compact, as you ought to expect, is a disambiguation page linking to articles about compact cars, interstate compacts, certain cosmetics (compact (cosmetics)), etc. etc. I directed that link to compact space. Michael Hardy (talk) 02:32, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) RobertHannah89 (talk) 04:14, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Re Progressively measurable process. I suggest you take up the question on the Talk page of that article. But see WP:MOSMATH for requirement for the lead of an article, understandability, etc.. Melcombe (talk) 10:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Progressively measurable process. Melcombe (talk) 13:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, RobertHannah89. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message[edit]

Hello, RobertHannah89. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of PR-CPA advantage[edit]

The article PR-CPA advantage has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Dictionary definition as well as a redundant fork of Chosen-plaintext attack. The "PR-CPA advantage" is nothing more than the probability of winning the game laid out in Chosen-plaintext_attack#General_method_of_an_attack.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BenKuykendall (talk) 19:37, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]