Suggested LifeWiki edits

[Book]

Twogun seems the same as the Period-60 glider gun

[dvgrn]

Twogun seems the same as the Period-60 glider gun

Yup, there's a redirect for Twogun that takes you to the period-60 glider gun page.

The "period-N glider gun" article format is a newer format, intended to document especially compact and/or significant guns, especially true-period guns, without having to make any attempt to create an article for every known gun (which would be a maintenance nightmare).

The surviving mention of The image and "RLE: here" format is an old LifeWiki style from before LifeViewer came along. The twogun image there should probably be replaced with a see-also link to "period-60 glider gun". I've added a review of older articles including this one to the LifeWiki:Task_list#Current_tasks list that you pointed out recently.

[Book]

Thanks for the info. I don't want to start editing things without understanding issues like this.

[Avengium]

I suggest clarifying more the process in:
https://www.conwaylife.com/wiki/Tutoria ... _Catagolue (to help people that wants to contribute)
$ Please enter number of soups per haul (minimum 10000000):
$ Please enter payosha256 key (e.g. '#anon'):
$ Please enter number of CPU threads to use (e.g. 4):

In here the payosha256 is "key" to accredit who has done the haul.

Explain in a more detailed way the Extended Wechsler Format in https://www.conwaylife.com/wiki/Apgcode

If i'm allowed to redact it on a more detailed way, i can work on it.

[yujh]

I suggest clarifying more the process in:
https://www.conwaylife.com/wiki/Tutoria ... _Catagolue (to help people that wants to contribute)
$ Please enter number of soups per haul (minimum 10000000):
$ Please enter payosha256 key (e.g. '#anon'):
$ Please enter number of CPU threads to use (e.g. 4):

In here the payosha256 is "key" to accredit who has done the haul.

Explain in a more detailed way the Extended Wechsler Format in https://www.conwaylife.com/wiki/Apgcode

If i'm allowed to redact it on a more detailed way, i can work on it.

Are you using a précomptées version of apgsearch or are you just ./apgluxe ?
Anyways it is not supposed to show you those stuff
And the minimum isn’t 10000000, the minimum required is actually 5000 soups.
People might just type in ./apgluxe -p [threads] -n [soups per haul] -k [key] —rule [you might not stick to CGOL] —symmetry [symmetry] and it doesn’t show you these three messages ( you will only have -k specified though if you want 10^7 soup per haul and your compiled rule and symmetry)

[Avengium]

I used precompiled apgsearch 5.x because the image diagram flow said i should use apgsearch 5.x on windows 10.
When i started the software it runs like W10 command prompt. And says exactly that thing.

If the apgsearch 5 is outdated, then actualize the wiki page. And say something like: "stop using that program, there is a new one".

If the apgsearch 5 is current, then someone could write a better message saying:
- "the current max is 5000 soups".
- "the payosha 256 key is your password in case you think #anon is a username"

Either case, the wiki page should be put to date and explain in a more detailed way the current things, to help the new people.

[GUYTU6J]

I used precompiled apgsearch 5.x because the image diagram flow said i should use apgsearch 5.x on windows 10. ...

Have you seen my latest PM? Apgsearch 5 is exactly not outdated, but the means to run it with precompiled version is. Looking closer, the flow diagram does not mention anything precompiled but there is a box saying Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL for short), which I have briefly written in my PM.
The reason why the article has not updated with removal of that precompiled thing, is that we don't actually expect someone to prefer it to WSL. It is like sorts of "last-resort" method for more restricted cases. Yet, the article should definitely be updated with modern implementation…!

...
And the minimum isn’t 10000000, the minimum required is actually 5000 soups.
...

Where does the newer limit come from?

[yujh]

...
And the minimum isn’t 10000000, the minimum required is actually 5000 soups.
...

Where does the newer limit come from?

I don’t know, but it should be somewhat not so new, probably because ikpx or some sort, but any non CGOL rules you can do 5000 soup per haul.

[Avengium]

The confusion in the diagram is between squares 1 to 2:
1. Make sure your displayed name starts with a '@'.
2. Use CPU-Z (win) or Proc /cpuinfo (unix) to find out.

First thing i thought: "i don't know what CPU-Z is, i am going to ommit this step".
The second thing i thought: "the only arrow that continues is to 3" .

3. My CPU is x86_64 and supports SS2 / AVX1 / AVX2.

If you follow that path, it goes to "i'm using windows" > assymetric soup > precompiled apgsearch 5.0.

And that's why i downloaded precompiled for windows. There is the only path if i want to search assymetric soups. Is the graphic the one that is outdated, not me.

[hotdogPi]

Wing, Block and glider, and Nine shouldn't need three separate pages. I first proposed the merge on Talk:Wing, and then I created a proposal for a merged article (plus a sentence about wing hasslers) in my userspace at User:HotdogPi/Wing. Other than the (fixable) bad gallery layout, my one issue is that the methuselah statistics aren't as good as they previously were (wing is 8 cells; minimum form is 6 cells), although I'm not sure it qualifies as a methuselah in the first place.

"Nine" and "Block and glider" would become redirects to Wing, not deleted outright.

I could do this myself, but I need to make sure it has support first.

[C28]

i suggest that the Wing and Blinker page be deleted. there is no text, the pattern in question isn't even shown on the page, and it generally feels abandoned.

[dvgrn]

i suggest that the Wing and Blinker page be deleted. there is no text, the pattern in question isn't even shown on the page, and it generally feels abandoned.

Your instincts are good on this one. There has been a delete template at the top of that page since GUYUT6J put one there in May 2020 (!). That's ordinarily all that has to be done to get rid of a page -- there shouldn't be any need to add a post here about this or any other particular page in the Pending Deletion category.

However, it's absolutely true that nobody among the LifeWiki admins really seems to enjoy going through and clearing out that category page -- probably because a lot of painful and time-consuming judgment calls tend to come up, so then everybody waits until they have a lot of time and energy available, and that doesn't happen all that often.

I've done a run-through and deleted all but four of the sixty old pending-deletion articles, and most of the pending-deletion categories. There are a few left for more ambitious people to deal with.

For example, there was a recommendation in Category:Oscillators_with_rotor_Pole_5 that all Pole_N categories from 5 to 15 should be deleted, since they weren't used for anything except the relevant barber poles. However, when I tried removing Category:Oscillators_with_rotor_Pole_5, I ended up with a redlink, because of the '''|rotor = Pole 5'' entry in [[Pentapole]].

It doesn't necessarily seem like a step forward to remove all of the '''|rotor = Pole N'' entries, though maybe that is a good idea. I'd certainly be in favor of fixing the whole problem by combining all of the blahblahpole articles into a single article.

[Book]

'Tis nobler nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,

[C28]

'Tis nobler nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,

wut

also, is the "This article may not meet the LifeWiki notability guidelines." thing on the U-turner page still necssary? i feel like the U-turner has shown that it is a notable pattern, but since i am not in a posision to decide that i would like the community to decide.

I really like the U-turner

[GUYTU6J]

...
also, is the "This article may not meet the LifeWiki notability guidelines." thing on the U-turner page still necssary? i feel like the U-turner has shown that it is a notable pattern, but since i am not in a posision to decide that i would like the community to decide.

I really like the U-turner

As far as I see, the notability of small evolving patterns lies not only in natural commonness and potential as an oscillator engine, but also applications in signal circuitry. Do we have stable/periodic connections like H-to-U-to-H (or even better, G-to-U-to-H)?

...Maybe another way is to move the article to your user namespace, along the lines of User:C28/U-turner gallery, where notability requirements are not as strict. There have been large quantities of userpages for borderline notable things, as you can see. And I am pretty much in favor of developing things in the user namespace before reaching standards and releasing to the main namespace. I have been doing that myself, Lx73 for instance. (By the way, sorry about the mess in its revision history!) And I also do that in the reverse direction; this artice is an example.
---
Speaking of Category:Articles of unclear notability, I can see that creation of half of those articles are attributed to a certain user:

C/12 R-pentomino crawler, Chopin, House on house siamese table-on-table weld hat-siamese-hat, Java Cell, Visions of Chaos

Although this is not unprecedented, it is still not well explained.

[dvgrn]

I really like the U-turner

As far as I see, the notability of small evolving patterns lies not only in natural commonness and potential as an oscillator engine, but also applications in signal circuitry. Do we have stable/periodic connections like H-to-U-to-H (or even better, G-to-U-to-H)?

As far as I know, U-turner universality using stable connections has not quite been established yet. At the rate we're going, when that is finally established, C28 will almost single-handedly have established the notability of the term "U-turner".

(Maybe it's already notable, in the sense that it's getting to where people are likely to see the term, say "Huh? What's a U-turner?" and turn to the LifeWiki to find out.)

The questionable-notability tag is on the page because... well, because Hunting's very last act of LifeWiki editing was to add that tag, soon after the page was created, and it still pretty much still makes sense to have it there. Some of the U-turner article's content is not really very relevant. One example is probably the mention of the ten-cell predecessor of U-turner phase 1. There are going to be an awful lot of U-turner-plus-1 predecessors out there with ten cells or less, so it's not at all clear why that particular one rates a mention in the article.

A little octohash investigation produces this:

Code: Select all

x = 401, y = 175, rule = B3/S23
308bo$307bo$307b3o2$305b2o$246bo57bo2bo$244bobo58b2o$245b2o$248bo59bo$
62bobo3b2o177bobo58b3o84bo$63b2o2bo2bo27bo4bo144bobo30bo29bo83bobo$8bo
54bo3bobo26b3o4bobo139bo3b2o25b2o3bobo26b2o83b2o$9bo28b2o28bo26bo7b2o
23b2o114bobo28bo2bo2b2o85b2o$7b3o2b2o23bobo21b2o32b2o30bobo28b2o26b2o
33bo23b2o28bobo58b2o29bobo24bo3b3o$11bobo23bo22bobo39bo24bo31bo25bo2bo
31bobo53bo4bo53bo2bo28bo26bo$4b2o5bo24b2o22b2o40b3o21b2o28b3o7b2o18bob
o27b2o2b2o58bobo53bobo27b2o26bo$4bobo3b2o93bo50bo8bobo19bo29b2o61bobo
54bo$5bobo96b2o14b2o37bo5bo17bo32bo64bo$6bo112bo2bo36b2o3b2o18bo36b2o
108bo32b3o$33b2o84bo2bo35bobo21b3o36bobo106bobo33bo$32bobo3bo81b2o2b3o
95bo107bobo32bo2b3o$33bo2b2o86bo60b2o144bo2b2o$37b2o86bo58bobo147bobo$
183bobo148bo$184bo24$o91bo$b2o28b2o58bobo$2o2b2o25bo58bo2bo3bo$4bobo
25b3o56b2o2b2o$5bo28bo61b2o$30b2o$29bobo$31bo33b2o$6bo29bo28bobo26bo$
5bobo27bobo29bo25bobo$5bobo27bobo29b2o25bobo$6bo29bo58b2o$73b2o$72bo2b
o$72bo2bo$73b2o2$75b2o$75bobo$75bo16$11bo30bo$10bobo28bobo$10bobo28bob
o$11bo30bo2$11b2o28b2o$11bobo27bobo26bo33bo$8bo2bo26bo2bo26b3o32bobo$
6b3o27b3o28bo30bo4b2o$5bo29bo31b2o28bobo$5b2o28b2o61bobo$63b2o34b2o$
62bobo$62b2o34bo$97b2o$64bo32bobo$64b2o$63bobo30$8bo2b2o35bo2b2o26bo$
6b3o2bobo32b3o2bobo23bobo$5bo6bobo2bo27bo6bobo23b2o$5b2o6bo2bo28b2o6bo
27b2o$16b3o63bo$54b2o23b3o$54bobo22bo$54bo$81bo$79b3o$78bo$78b2o28$12b
obo$7bo5b2o$6bobo4bo$5bobo$5b2o4b2o$11b2o!

LifeHistory, two versions:

Code: Select all

x = 426, y = 339, rule = LifeHistory
333.B$331.5B$331.5B$330.6B$330.3BD3B$330.2BD6B$329.3B3D4B$328.10B$
328.2B2D6B$270.BD2B54.BD2BD4B$269.DBD3B55.2D6B$127.B141.B2D3B56.7B$
92.3B31.3B140.4BD2B54.3BD5B$87.DBD.2B2DB28.4B2A138.4BDBDB53.4B3D4B80.
DB$.3D28.A29.A23.2B2D2BC.BDB25.AD4BD2B21.A29.A29.A29.A24.5BADBD26.A3.
DB20.4BA3BD3B22.A29.A26.BD.C$.3D27.2AC27.3A21.3BD2BACADB25.3C4BDBD20.
3A27.3A27.3A27.3A24.2BD3A2D25.2CA.BD.D19.3B3AB2D3B21.3A27.3A26.DC2A$D
.D27.A3BDB24.A2B2D19.6BA2BD2B24.C.6B2DB19.A2B2D25.A7B22.A4B25.A4B23.B
DAD4B24.C2.DB.2D20.2BA9B20.A4B25.A2B2D24.BA4B$2D28.AB3DB.2D21.ABD.D
19.2B2D2BA4B25.CDB3.6B18.ABD.D25.A2B2D3B21.BA2D2B25.A5BD23.CD3B25.C.D
.4B20.2BA8B20.BA2D2B25.ABD.D24.DA2B3D$29.2BA2B.BDBD20.2BADB19.2BD.D3B
A29.A3.2BD4B9.B.B5.2BADB25.2BA2BD4B2.B15.3BDABDBA23.2BA3BD.D23.A29.C
2.2BD22.2BA3BA3B18.3BDABDBA23.2BADB24.BDBA2.B$29.2D5BD22.2B2DB20.B2D
3B35.2B3D3B7.7B2.2B2DB26.B3D7B2D13.5BDBDA25.B2D2B2DB56.BD.D23.3BA4B
17.5BDBDA24.2B2DB25.D$29.DBD3B2D21.6B20.5B38.3BD2B6.14B27.BD8BD.D13.
6BDB26.2B2D4B56.BC.D26.4B18.6BDB24.6B$29.BDBD2B23.5B22.B.2B40.2DB7.6B
2D6B28.3BD5BDB14.2BD7B25.D6B57.AD28.2B19.10B22.5B$31.D3B23.4B67.2B8.
5BD2BD3B30.3B2D3B2D16.2BD6B28.2B2D108.D9B23.3D3B$31.3B23.B2D2B77.5BD
2BD4B29.2BDBD4B17.3D6B29.BD.D106.DBD8B23.2BD3B$57.DBD3BD76.2B2.B2D2B
3D29.8B18.9B30.BD106.BDBD8B24.CAB3D$58.D2B2DB82.3BD.B30.6B19.3B2D2B
139.3BD2B2D3B27.B.2B$59.3B2D86.D31.5B20.2BDBD2B140.5BDBD2B$60.4B119.
4B21.DBD2B143.3BD3B$208.BD2B144.6B$358.2B12$28.B88.B$25.D5B84.2BDB$
25.B2D3B25.2D56.2BDBD2B$24.B2D2B2DB24.DB55.2BD2BD3BD$25.4BD.D23.2B3D
54.2B2D2B2DB$24.6BD23.5BD54.7B2D$24.7BA22.B2D4BA52.7BAB$24.8B22.DBD5B
29.2B22.B.5B$25.3BA3BA22.BDBA3BA26.A2DA2B2.3B18.4BA$25.6BDA22.6BDA26.
BDBC8B16.2BD2BA$26.2B.BDBC23.2B.BDBC26.3BC.7B17.D.DBA$29.AD.C26.AD.C
26.A2BCD6B19.C.DA$30.AC28.AC28.2A8B20.2C$92.B2.3B2DB$95.2BD2BD$95.2BD
2BDB$96.2B2D2B$96.6B$96.4B2D$97.3BD.D$99.BDB6$35.AD30.DA$34.BC.D28.D.
CB$34.BD.D28.D.DB$34.2BD30.D2B$35.3B28.3B$36.2D28.2D$33.3BD.D24.3BD.D
24.2BD32.AD$32.ADABDB24.ADABDB24.ADCD26.ABA.2BC.D$31.2CD2B25.2CD2B25.
AC3B25.2AD4B2D$30.C2.B26.C2.B26.AB2D26.ABDBD5B$30.2C28.2C27.B2A28.2AB
DBCBAB2A$87.B2D2B29.3B2D4B$85.2BDBD2B30.6B$84.3B2D3B29.2BD2B$85.6B30.
B2DB$87.2BD2B29.BDBD$88.B2DB$88.DBDB18$97.A6.3B$37.B58.2BA5.6B$32.AC
2BCDB33.AC2BCD15.2A4B4.BD5B$31.2CD2BDBD2B30.2CD2BD.D13.2A6B2.DBD6B$
30.C2.3BADBD2BD27.C2.3BAD.D11.A4BA3B.2B2D7B$30.2C2.A2.BD2BD.B26.2C2.A
2.BDB11.2A2BA10B2D4B$39.2B3D33.4B10.16BD2B$41.2B34.BACD11.12B3D2B$77.
2BD.D12.10BD3B$79.DB13.14B$95.10B.DB$97.B3.3B3DB$101.2BD$103.2D18$32.
A2BA.DBDB$32.C3B.B2DB$31.C.DA3BD2B$30.C.C.4B.2B$30.2C4.2DB$36.2D62$
333.B$331.5B$331.5B$330.6B$330.3BA3B$330.2BA6B$329.3B3A4B$328.10B$
328.2B2A6B$270.BA2B54.BA2BA4B$269.ABA3B55.2A6B$127.B141.B2A3B56.7B$
92.3B31.3B140.4BA2B54.3BA5B$87.ABA.2B2AB28.6B138.4BABAB53.4B3A4B80.AB
$.3D27.3D27.3D22.2B2ABDCDBAB24.2DC4BA2B20.3D27.3D27.3D27.3D23.4B2DCBA
25.3D2.AB20.3B3D2BA3B21.3D27.3D25.BADCD$.3D27.2DC27.3D21.3BA2BDCDAB
25.3C4BABA20.3D27.3D27.3D27.3D24.2BA3D2A25.2CD.BA.A19.3B3DB2A3B21.3D
27.3D26.AC2D$D.D27.DBDBAB24.DBD2A19.6BDBDA2B24.C.D5B2AB19.DBD2A25.DBD
5B22.DBD2B25.DBD2B23.BADAD3B24.C.DAB.2A20.2BDBD7B20.DBD2B25.DBD2A24.B
DBD2B$2D28.2D3AB.2A21.2DA.A19.2B2A2B2D3B25.2CB3.6B18.2DA.A25.2DB2A3B
21.BDCA2B25.2D4BA23.2C3B25.CDA.4B20.2B2D7B20.BDCA2B25.2DA.A24.A2DB3A$
29.5B.BABA20.3BAB19.2BA.A4B29.B3.2BA4B9.B.B5.3BAB25.5BA4B2.B15.3BA2BA
2B23.6BA.A23.B29.A2.2BA22.10B18.3BA2BA2B23.3BAB24.BA2B2.B$29.2A5BA22.
2B2AB20.B2A3B35.2B3A3B7.7B2.2B2AB26.B3A7B2A13.5BABAB25.B2A2B2AB56.BA.
A23.8B17.5BABAB24.2B2AB25.A$29.ABA3B2A21.6B20.5B38.3BA2B6.14B27.BA8BA
.A13.6BAB26.2B2A4B56.BA.A26.4B18.6BAB24.6B$29.BABA2B23.5B22.B.2B40.2A
B7.6B2A6B28.3BA5BAB14.2BA7B25.A6B57.BA28.2B19.10B22.5B$31.A3B23.4B67.
2B8.5BA2BA3B30.3B2A3B2A16.2BA6B28.2B2A108.A9B23.3A3B$31.3B23.B2A2B77.
5BA2BA4B29.2BABA4B17.3A6B29.BA.A106.ABA8B23.2BA3B$57.ABA3BA76.2B2.B2A
2B3A29.8B18.9B30.BA106.BABA8B24.A2B3A$58.A2B2AB82.3BA.B30.6B19.3B2A2B
139.3BA2B2A3B27.B.2B$59.3B2A86.A31.5B20.2BABA2B140.5BABA2B$60.4B119.
4B21.ABA2B143.3BA3B$208.BA2B144.6B$358.2B12$28.B88.B$25.A5B84.2BAB$
25.B2A3B25.2A56.2BABA2B$24.B2A2B2AB24.AB55.2BA2BA3BA$25.4BA.A23.2B3A
54.2B2A2B2AB$24.6BA23.5BA54.7B2A$24.8B22.B2A5B52.9B$24.8B22.ABA5B29.
2B22.B.5B$25.8B22.BA6B26.B2A3B2.3B18.5B$25.6BC2D21.6BC2D25.BADCD7B16.
2BAB3D$26.2B.BADCD22.2B.BADCD25.2BDCD7B17.A.A3D$29.BC.C26.BC.C26.BDBC
A6B19.ADAD$30.DC28.DC28.2D8B20.2C$92.B2.3B2AB$95.2BA2BA$95.2BA2BAB$
96.2B2A2B$96.6B$96.4B2A$97.3BA.A$99.BAB6$35.BA30.AB$34.BA.A28.A.AB$
34.BA.A28.A.AB$34.2BA30.A2B$35.3B28.3B$36.2A28.2A$33.3BA.A24.3BA.A24.
2BA32.BA$31.2DC2BAB23.2DC2BAB23.2DC2A25.3DB.2BA.A$31.3C2B25.3C2B25.DC
D2B25.2DC4B2A$30.C.DB26.C.DB26.DBCA26.DBCBA5B$30.2C28.2C27.B2D28.2DBA
BA5B$87.B2A2B29.3B2A4B$85.2BABA2B30.6B$84.3B2A3B29.2BA2B$85.6B30.B2AB
$87.2BA2B29.BABA$88.B2AB$88.ABAB18$97.B6.3B$37.B58.3B5.6B$31.2DC2B2AB
32.2DC2B2A14.3D4B4.BA5B$31.3C2BABA2B30.3C2BA.A13.3D5B2.ABA6B$30.C.D4B
ABA2BA27.C.D4BA.A11.DBD6B.2B2A7B$30.2C2.B2.BA2BA.B26.2C2.B2.BAB11.2D
13B2A4B$39.2B3A33.4B10.16BA2B$41.2B34.2B2A11.12B3A2B$77.2BA.A12.10BA
3B$79.AB13.14B$95.10B.AB$97.B3.3B3AB$101.2BA$103.2A18$32.4B.ABAB$31.D
CD2B.B2AB$31.CDC4BA2B$30.C.C.4B.2B$30.2C4.2AB$36.2A!

There are 28 matches for the U-turner, and 70 matches for the U-turner-plus-1 (not shown above). Only two of the U-turner-plus-1 collisions go through that ten-cell predecessor, via an impressively crazy sequence that includes a century-plus-tub followed by a pi-explosion-plus-blinker (!):

Code: Select all

x = 41, y = 26, rule = LifeHistory
37.A$35.A.A$8.A27.2A$7.A.A$.2A3.A2.A21.2A5.2A$A2.A3.2A2.2A17.A2.A3.A
2.A$A2.A7.A.A16.A2.A3.A.A$.2A8.A19.2A5.A16$5.5D25.5D$7.3D27.3D$8.2D
28.2D!

The really common U-turner predecessor seems to be the seven-cell 2bo$b3o$o$o$bo!, so I'm not sure it makes much sense to mention other variants like the ten-cell one, and not mention the various 7-bitters.

Anyway, long story short, I figure that the U-turner will most likely become notable eventually, so it doesn't make sense to delete the article. Until the case is proven and the non-notable details are removed, though, I'm in favor of leaving that questionable-notability tag in place.

Speaking of Category:Articles of unclear notability, I can see that creation of half of those articles are attributed to a certain user:

C/12 R-pentomino crawler, Chopin, House on house siamese table-on-table weld hat-siamese-hat, Java Cell, Visions of Chaos

Although this is not unprecedented, it is still not well explained.

Yikes, the "house on house siamese table-on-table weld hat-siamese-hat"... that name just seems terrible to me, though I can't say why. Probably it's partly that it's inconsistent: there should be dashes in "house-on-house" or no dashes in the other pairings. And anyway "house-on-house" should maybe be "dead spark coil", though I can see why it looked cooler the other way -- but really the point should be that it's just not a good idea to try to give descriptive names to objects that are this big and complex.

My informal plan has been to leave a scattering of things like this in the LifeWiki, with questionable-notability tags on them, as beautiful examples of What Not To Do for everyone else to see. It can be hard to tell that an article isn't a good idea, for some object that you're really enthusiastic about; it's easier to get a sense of how notability works, when there's an example available that you don't particularly care about one way or the other.

[hotdogPi]

The seven-cell predecessor that I see a lot is this one:

Code: Select all

x = 4, y = 5, rule = B3/S23
o$o$o$o2bo$b2o!

I actually don't recognize the one you listed for some reason.

[dvgrn]

The seven-cell predecessor that I see a lot is this one:

Code: Select all

x = 4, y = 5, rule = B3/S23
o$o$o$o2bo$b2o!

I actually don't recognize the one you listed for some reason.

Yup, that's shown in the second row of the LifeHistory stamp collection I posted. Oddly enough, it showed up only four times in the octohash database, whereas the one I listed showed up fourteen times. Could be some kind of octohash search artifact -- e.g., three of them form the same way due to sparking an eater from the tail end -- but there's enough variety that it seems like that predecessor ought to be quite common.

[C28]

i feel like the pages herschel parent, herschel grandparent, and herschel great-grandparent should be merged either into the herschel page or into a new page. there isn't a need for separate pages.

[Book]

i feel like the pages herschel parent, herschel grandparent, and herschel great-grandparent should be merged either into the herschel page or into a new page. there isn't a need for separate pages.

Herschel ancestors?

[dvgrn]

Herschel ancestors?

I'm often not quite sure how to format this kind of thing, so I just leave it for other people who have more definite opinions to sort it out. I think maybe in this case the reasonable thing might be to have a "Herschel ancestors" gallery on the Herschel page -- with redirects to that section of that article from all of the existing article names.

[Book]

Herschel ancestors?

I'm often not quite sure how to format this kind of thing, so I just leave it for other people who have more definite opinions to sort it out. I think maybe in this case the reasonable thing might be to have a "Herschel ancestors" gallery on the Herschel page -- with redirects to that section of that article from all of the existing article names.

I'll give it a go.

[Book]

It doesn't necessarily seem like a step forward to remove all of the '''|rotor = Pole N'' entries, though maybe that is a good idea. I'd certainly be in favor of fixing the whole problem by combining all of the blahblahpole articles into a single article.

I've merged all the blahblahpole content into the barberpole article. Have not redirectd the blahblahpole pages yet, but plan to soon. Meanwhile, please take a look at Mr. Barberpole. Still needs a few tweaks. Will probably add pseudopole section as well.

Chopping down poles!

[Book]

1. No pseudopole section on barberpole page. I think that would mix apples with oranges.

2. Ian07 did most of the blahpole redirects after I signed off yesterday--as if we had planned it--but left bi, tri and quad. I'd just as well redirect them too, because all the content is now also in barberpole and I prefer a single-source-of truth to reduce future maintenance errors, but I'm content with letting that sit awhile.

[yoleo]

I think the LLS tutorial isn't quite right in the following:

Symmetries are also now in the -s option, so -p 4 -x 1 -y 0 -s "D2-" in the regular version would be -s p4 x1 y0 "D2-" in the development version.

According to this, in the development version, the search for the Brain described in the tutorial should become:

Code: Select all

./lls -S lingeling -c -b 17 12 -s p3 x0 y1 "D2|"
...
Number of undetermined cells: 595

The number of undetermined cells should be around 300 (3 gens * 12 rows * 17 cols/order 2 symmetry), when it's more like 600 here. That makes me think it's enforcing the composition of the translation and the reflection, instead of two symmetries separately. Listing the symmetries separately does the trick:

Code: Select all

./lls -S lingeling -c -b 17 12 -s p3 x0 y1 -s "D2|"
...
Number of undetermined cells: 315

Could someone fix this and/or give me editing privileges so I can fix it?