The discussion now moved to Talk:Matrix theory#Should we merge Matrix theory into Matrix (mathematics)?. There is another user who is interested in these matters. I pasted on that page what you wrote to me. Let's see if we can arrive at any reasonable solution. Oleg Alexandrov 19:11, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hi MathMartin, When you turn a page into a redirect ( graph (mathematics)), remember to check "what links here" and fix double-redirects! There were lots of redirect pages pointing at graph (mathematics) that had to be fixed. Dbenbenn 01:04, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Sorry if I offended you with my poor choice of word ("gibberish"). I didn't mean it that way; I just meant that to someone who doesn't know any German, it would appear that way. Indeed, to someone who only knows English, the German title is "unintelligible or nonsensical talk or writing". But I should have explained that better. Dbenbenn 18:40, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
A saw you changed [Newtons difference method|Newton's difference method] to [Newton polynomial|Newton's difference method] to bypass a redirect on polynomial. I do not consider this a good change. A redirect is inexpensive and provides more information than a direct link. Before your change I could have used the what links here function in the toolbar to show me all links to Newton polynomial and the redirect Newtons difference method would give my a hint as to what sort of information the user is looking for when he visits the page from polynomial. Now this information is lost. MathMartin 15:10, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
You have a good point. In the case above, and in other similar cases, redirects are not only for backward compatibility. I will pay more attention in the future. I put back the link at polynomial Oleg Alexandrov | talk 20:02, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hi, couple of issues: (1) there is confusion over whether a "minor" is a certain submatrix or the determinant of it. Your usage is the opposite to that of the minor (linear algebra) page; (2) in any case you want the cofactor, not the minor, so that the sign is right; (3) admittance matrix only defines it for undirected graphs. I thought you might like to fix these problems yourself, but feel free to flick them to me. -- Zero 10:08, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I noticed you've done some work on Mathematics articles. I wanted to point out to you the new Mathematics Wikiportal- more specifically, to the Mathematics Collaboration of the Week page. I'm looking for any math-related stubs or non-existant articles that you would like to see on Wikipedia. Additionally, I wondered if you'd be willing to help out on some of the Collaboration of the Week pages.
I encourage you to vote on the current Collaboration of the Week, because I'm very interested in which articles you think need to be written or added to, and because I understand that I cannot do the enormous amount of work required on some of the Math stubs alone. I'm asking for your help, and also your critiques on the way the portal is set up.
Please direct all comments to my user-talk page, the Math Wikiportal talk page, or the Math Collaboration of the Week talk page. Thanks a lot for your support! ral315 02:54, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
Hi Martin.
In case you didn't follow the discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Reformat of Participants list, I'm writing to you to let you know that I've converted the " WikiProject Mathematics Participants List" into a table. It is now alphabetical, includes links to the participant's talk page and contribution list, and has a field for "Areas of Interest". Since your name is on the list, I thought you might want to update your entry.
Regards, Paul August ☎ 22:55, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
Hi, Martin! I've answered about the DMFA at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Društvo Matematikov Fizikov in Astronomov Slovenije. You should first decide whether the article should stay, and after that I might redirect to proper name, which is mentioned there (in lower cases, ...). Thanks for your notice. -- XJamRastafire 13:08, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi,
I don't like some details in your change in Cauchy sequence
If you want, please make the appropriate modifications. — MFH: Talk 19:07, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've noticed that when you write biographies (or biostubs) you tend to introduce people as e.g. "a [[Norwegians|Norwegian]] [[mathematician]]" or "a [[German people|German]] [[mathematician]]". In all fairness this actually makes a lot of sense, in that it links the "nationality" adjective to the "nationality" page rather than to the "nation-state" page. However, you are the only person I've ever seen do it! Normally people write those previous examples as [[Norway|Norwegian]] or [[Germany|German]]. I think everybody picks the latter because the style guide recommends it, or just for the "principle of least surprise for wiki links" (and by a vicious circle it's become de facto standard). Sometimes when I come across a link of yours like that I change it to the normal style, sometimes I don't bother, I don't really see it as a "correction" or a big improvement or that you're making a mistake. But I just wondered if you realised that 99% of biographies link from the nationality adjective to the country not the people? I was very surprised when I clicked on one of the links you provided once, but after about 5 seconds I saw where you were coming from! Anyway, I see you're doing a lot of good work so please keep it up :) VivaEmilyDavies 17:53, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Side note: I was wondering about introducing a "MacTutor" template? Both of us seem to link to the MacTutor archive. My idea is that by typing something along the lines of typing {{subst:MacTutor|ore}} the template would produce automatically: *[http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Ore.html Biography] in the [[MacTutor History of Mathematics archive]] which then appears as:
I think the template would just have to read:
*[http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/{{{1}}}.html Biography] in the [[MacTutor History of Mathematics archive]]
Would this be useful and/or time-saving do you think? If you have an opinion, please reply on my talk page. Thanks! :) VivaEmilyDavies 18:03, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
See also the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics#Template:MacTutor_Biography_.26mdash.3B_what_about_Template:MathGenealogy_like_it.3F. BACbKA 18:55, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
If needed, I could run my bot to convert things to the new template. The pattern is quite simple, as one takes the family name of the mathematician from the page at MacTutor, so the URL http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Birkhoff.html obviously refers to Birkhoff. Then we could both check after the bot if it did a good job. Oleg Alexandrov 19:38, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Can you modify your bot to guess missing MacTutor links using the mathematicians last name and then check if the link works ? MathMartin 19:57, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I posted a suggestion at talk:Norm (mathematics). Cheers, AxelBoldt 20:00, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I merged your mention of "copying a PlanetMath theorem to bounded set (topological vector space)" on Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange/46-XX Functional analysis. I figured it out that you put that remark on my page, because the link was coming from there. But my page is an outdated mirror of the real thing, which I keep for testing purposes (and will use in the future to update our index of PlanetMath articles).
And thanks for splitting things from bounded set. I think it is nice that we have an elementary article about that. Oleg Alexandrov 15:15, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Hey Martin, thanks for your vote in support of my admin nomination. Paul August ☎ 16:57, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that the page on ideal numbers mentions that they were introduced by Kummer "while trying to prove Fermat's last theorem", a phrase that originates when you modified the redirect into a stub.
Harold Edwards and others argue, I think persuasively, that Kummer came up with the notion while investigating higher reciprocity laws rather than Fermat's last theorem directly. Would it be appropriate to change the text perhaps to include both rather than just FLT? Arturo Magidin, July 2 2005, 3:30 (MDT)
I'd like you to take another look, because I don't see how your description agrees with mine. What's r? What's R(1)? Why does φ get redefined (should it be r)? Your version says that for every f there's a φ such that..., while mine says that there's a smn such that for every p.... And how are these statements related, anyway? Gazpacho 02:58, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I don't understand the second paragraph.
The idea of topologies being stronger or weaker does not apply to two different spaces, the domain and codomain. Presumably you mean that if f:X->Y is continuous, the topology induced on X is weaker than that of X. But then I don't understand why it is relevant that f is surjective. If you are trying to get at topological invariance, the open set definition is already evidently so. I would suggest giving the open set definition first, and then stating that it is equivalent to the epsilon-delta definition for metric spaces. 165.230.90.57 15:31, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
Hello,
Since you contributed in the past to the publications’ lists, I thought that you might be interested in this new project. I’ll be glad if you will continue contributing. Thanks, APH 11:01, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
A page you created, MathMartin\Newton polynomial, was nominated for deletion. As it looks like you were attempting to create a user subpage, I've moved the page to User:MathMartin/Newton polynomial. Good luck with your work on the article. — Ilmari Karonen 01:22, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Hi, could you tell me from where do you know Hugo Steinhaus full name. I'm curious about "Wladyslaw". Is http://www.genealogy.math.ndsu.nodak.edu/html/id.phtml?id=7383 your only source? Thanks in advance.
The discussion now moved to Talk:Matrix theory#Should we merge Matrix theory into Matrix (mathematics)?. There is another user who is interested in these matters. I pasted on that page what you wrote to me. Let's see if we can arrive at any reasonable solution. Oleg Alexandrov 19:11, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hi MathMartin, When you turn a page into a redirect ( graph (mathematics)), remember to check "what links here" and fix double-redirects! There were lots of redirect pages pointing at graph (mathematics) that had to be fixed. Dbenbenn 01:04, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Sorry if I offended you with my poor choice of word ("gibberish"). I didn't mean it that way; I just meant that to someone who doesn't know any German, it would appear that way. Indeed, to someone who only knows English, the German title is "unintelligible or nonsensical talk or writing". But I should have explained that better. Dbenbenn 18:40, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
A saw you changed [Newtons difference method|Newton's difference method] to [Newton polynomial|Newton's difference method] to bypass a redirect on polynomial. I do not consider this a good change. A redirect is inexpensive and provides more information than a direct link. Before your change I could have used the what links here function in the toolbar to show me all links to Newton polynomial and the redirect Newtons difference method would give my a hint as to what sort of information the user is looking for when he visits the page from polynomial. Now this information is lost. MathMartin 15:10, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
You have a good point. In the case above, and in other similar cases, redirects are not only for backward compatibility. I will pay more attention in the future. I put back the link at polynomial Oleg Alexandrov | talk 20:02, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hi, couple of issues: (1) there is confusion over whether a "minor" is a certain submatrix or the determinant of it. Your usage is the opposite to that of the minor (linear algebra) page; (2) in any case you want the cofactor, not the minor, so that the sign is right; (3) admittance matrix only defines it for undirected graphs. I thought you might like to fix these problems yourself, but feel free to flick them to me. -- Zero 10:08, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I noticed you've done some work on Mathematics articles. I wanted to point out to you the new Mathematics Wikiportal- more specifically, to the Mathematics Collaboration of the Week page. I'm looking for any math-related stubs or non-existant articles that you would like to see on Wikipedia. Additionally, I wondered if you'd be willing to help out on some of the Collaboration of the Week pages.
I encourage you to vote on the current Collaboration of the Week, because I'm very interested in which articles you think need to be written or added to, and because I understand that I cannot do the enormous amount of work required on some of the Math stubs alone. I'm asking for your help, and also your critiques on the way the portal is set up.
Please direct all comments to my user-talk page, the Math Wikiportal talk page, or the Math Collaboration of the Week talk page. Thanks a lot for your support! ral315 02:54, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)
Hi Martin.
In case you didn't follow the discussion on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Reformat of Participants list, I'm writing to you to let you know that I've converted the " WikiProject Mathematics Participants List" into a table. It is now alphabetical, includes links to the participant's talk page and contribution list, and has a field for "Areas of Interest". Since your name is on the list, I thought you might want to update your entry.
Regards, Paul August ☎ 22:55, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
Hi, Martin! I've answered about the DMFA at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Društvo Matematikov Fizikov in Astronomov Slovenije. You should first decide whether the article should stay, and after that I might redirect to proper name, which is mentioned there (in lower cases, ...). Thanks for your notice. -- XJamRastafire 13:08, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi,
I don't like some details in your change in Cauchy sequence
If you want, please make the appropriate modifications. — MFH: Talk 19:07, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've noticed that when you write biographies (or biostubs) you tend to introduce people as e.g. "a [[Norwegians|Norwegian]] [[mathematician]]" or "a [[German people|German]] [[mathematician]]". In all fairness this actually makes a lot of sense, in that it links the "nationality" adjective to the "nationality" page rather than to the "nation-state" page. However, you are the only person I've ever seen do it! Normally people write those previous examples as [[Norway|Norwegian]] or [[Germany|German]]. I think everybody picks the latter because the style guide recommends it, or just for the "principle of least surprise for wiki links" (and by a vicious circle it's become de facto standard). Sometimes when I come across a link of yours like that I change it to the normal style, sometimes I don't bother, I don't really see it as a "correction" or a big improvement or that you're making a mistake. But I just wondered if you realised that 99% of biographies link from the nationality adjective to the country not the people? I was very surprised when I clicked on one of the links you provided once, but after about 5 seconds I saw where you were coming from! Anyway, I see you're doing a lot of good work so please keep it up :) VivaEmilyDavies 17:53, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Side note: I was wondering about introducing a "MacTutor" template? Both of us seem to link to the MacTutor archive. My idea is that by typing something along the lines of typing {{subst:MacTutor|ore}} the template would produce automatically: *[http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Ore.html Biography] in the [[MacTutor History of Mathematics archive]] which then appears as:
I think the template would just have to read:
*[http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/{{{1}}}.html Biography] in the [[MacTutor History of Mathematics archive]]
Would this be useful and/or time-saving do you think? If you have an opinion, please reply on my talk page. Thanks! :) VivaEmilyDavies 18:03, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
See also the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics#Template:MacTutor_Biography_.26mdash.3B_what_about_Template:MathGenealogy_like_it.3F. BACbKA 18:55, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
If needed, I could run my bot to convert things to the new template. The pattern is quite simple, as one takes the family name of the mathematician from the page at MacTutor, so the URL http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Birkhoff.html obviously refers to Birkhoff. Then we could both check after the bot if it did a good job. Oleg Alexandrov 19:38, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Can you modify your bot to guess missing MacTutor links using the mathematicians last name and then check if the link works ? MathMartin 19:57, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I posted a suggestion at talk:Norm (mathematics). Cheers, AxelBoldt 20:00, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I merged your mention of "copying a PlanetMath theorem to bounded set (topological vector space)" on Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/PlanetMath Exchange/46-XX Functional analysis. I figured it out that you put that remark on my page, because the link was coming from there. But my page is an outdated mirror of the real thing, which I keep for testing purposes (and will use in the future to update our index of PlanetMath articles).
And thanks for splitting things from bounded set. I think it is nice that we have an elementary article about that. Oleg Alexandrov 15:15, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Hey Martin, thanks for your vote in support of my admin nomination. Paul August ☎ 16:57, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that the page on ideal numbers mentions that they were introduced by Kummer "while trying to prove Fermat's last theorem", a phrase that originates when you modified the redirect into a stub.
Harold Edwards and others argue, I think persuasively, that Kummer came up with the notion while investigating higher reciprocity laws rather than Fermat's last theorem directly. Would it be appropriate to change the text perhaps to include both rather than just FLT? Arturo Magidin, July 2 2005, 3:30 (MDT)
I'd like you to take another look, because I don't see how your description agrees with mine. What's r? What's R(1)? Why does φ get redefined (should it be r)? Your version says that for every f there's a φ such that..., while mine says that there's a smn such that for every p.... And how are these statements related, anyway? Gazpacho 02:58, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
I don't understand the second paragraph.
The idea of topologies being stronger or weaker does not apply to two different spaces, the domain and codomain. Presumably you mean that if f:X->Y is continuous, the topology induced on X is weaker than that of X. But then I don't understand why it is relevant that f is surjective. If you are trying to get at topological invariance, the open set definition is already evidently so. I would suggest giving the open set definition first, and then stating that it is equivalent to the epsilon-delta definition for metric spaces. 165.230.90.57 15:31, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
Hello,
Since you contributed in the past to the publications’ lists, I thought that you might be interested in this new project. I’ll be glad if you will continue contributing. Thanks, APH 11:01, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
A page you created, MathMartin\Newton polynomial, was nominated for deletion. As it looks like you were attempting to create a user subpage, I've moved the page to User:MathMartin/Newton polynomial. Good luck with your work on the article. — Ilmari Karonen 01:22, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
Hi, could you tell me from where do you know Hugo Steinhaus full name. I'm curious about "Wladyslaw". Is http://www.genealogy.math.ndsu.nodak.edu/html/id.phtml?id=7383 your only source? Thanks in advance.