User talk:Greg Martin

|width=10% align=center style="background:#F5F5F5"|  |}

Welcome, new editor! We're very glad you've joined us. Here are pointers for a quick start. Also, when you get a chance, please read The Editor Role. You can look at Getting Started and our help system for other introductory pages. It is also important, for project-wide matters, to join the Citizendium-L (broadcast) mailing list. Announcements are also available via Twitter. You can test out editing in the sandbox if you'd like. If you need help to get going, the forum is one option. That's also where we discuss policy and proposals. You can ask any administrator for help, too. Just put a note on their "talk" page. Again, welcome and thank you! We appreciate your willingness to share your expertise, and we hope to see your edits on Recent changes soon. --Larry Sanger 15:14, 6 March 2007 (CST)

Big O notation

Hi, I proposed moving "Big O notation" to "Complexity of algorithms" or something like this. A constable (Matt) suggested that an opinion of an editor would be appreciated. So could you please take a look at Big O notation and my rationale given Matt's talk page and leave a comment there? Thanks in advance. --AlekStos 08:39, 26 March 2007 (CDT)

I responded on Alek's talk page. - Greg Martin 17:58, 24 April 2007 (CDT)

Prime Numbers

Thank you so much for your editorial guidance in Prime Numbers. Nancy Sculerati 20:28, 25 April 2007 (CDT)

I, too, appreciate your time. Thanks. Greg Woodhouse 09:17, 26 April 2007 (CDT)

Greg, you can edit the article yourself and still nominate it for approval. Every suggestion does not have to be carried out by others when an editor reviews a well developed article like Prime number for nomination for approval. Nancy Sculerati 09:39, 29 April 2007 (CDT)

Primes of the form n^2 + 1

This one is new to me. Off-hand, it seems that y = x^2 + 1 is og genus 0 and thus rationally equivalent to a line (not necessarily over Q, but over some finite extension). If it were rationally equivalent to a line over Q, it seems that we ought to be able to appeal to Dirichlet's theorem on infinitely many primes in an arithmetic progression. Just thinking out loud, I guess. Greg Woodhouse 11:15, 29 April 2007 (CDT)

Responded on Greg's talk page - Greg Martin 16:15, 29 April 2007 (CDT)

Talk Approval

I think it always does that, and you've made no error.David Tribe 20:16, 29 April 2007 (CDT)