The article titled Classification of manifolds says some manifolds are geometrizable and some are not, and the article titled Geometrization conjecture seems to suggest that that means a manifold admits a "geometric structure". The concept is not defined in either article, and Geometric structure redirects to an article in which that term appears once, without a definition, and the word geometrizable occurs twice, also without a definition. Can someone put a definition at some appropriate place in those articles? Michael Hardy ( talk) 17:38, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Can someone else take a look at the lead of Infinity? It's gone through several changes recently and it's a balancing act between being technically correct and being common language. I suppose I lean farther towards being technically correct than towards using common language, since I think that the common language surrounding "infinity" is often be misleading (e.g. "it cannot be counted or measured even in principle").
More eyes are always welcome. — MarkH21 ( talk) 23:28, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
This is about common language. It is therefore nonsensical to try introducing mathematical accuracy. "Number" without link would be fine except that it may be confusing for people knowing of infinite numbers. So I put "common number", but I will be fine if "common" is removed. On the other hand, I am strongly against linking.D.Lazard ( talk) 23:40, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
This is an announcement that I have created an alternative account of mine: User:Math-drafts to move some of old drafts in the [[Draft:]] namespace to the subpages of that user page. While I am in control of the account, the draft pages in that user page are meant to belong to the community and all the editors should feel free to edit them as fit (including moving to mainspace or even deleting them). This alternative account itself will never make an edit.
Please let me know if there is any issue. —- Taku ( talk) 09:14, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
{{u|
Mark viking}} {
Talk}
23:57, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
Folks here may be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 November 10#Template:Mabs. – Deacon Vorbis ( carbon • videos) 19:19, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
For your consideration: the new article Dubner's conjecture. The Dubner in question is Harvey Dubner, the subject of an old (2007) but weakly referenced biography. Do appropriate sources exist? -- JBL ( talk) 16:18, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
See discussion at Help talk:Citation Style 1#MR numbers not rendering properly. — David Eppstein ( talk) 07:10, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi all, I have been writing the article Draft:Structural Ramsey theory, and have just submitted it for review. I have done my best to give a complete account, and provide adequate context and references. I would appreciate if anyone could give feedback and/or review.
-- Jordan Mitchell Barrett ( talk) 09:52, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
{{u|
Mark viking}} {
Talk}
11:37, 30 November 2019 (UTC)The article titled Classification of manifolds says some manifolds are geometrizable and some are not, and the article titled Geometrization conjecture seems to suggest that that means a manifold admits a "geometric structure". The concept is not defined in either article, and Geometric structure redirects to an article in which that term appears once, without a definition, and the word geometrizable occurs twice, also without a definition. Can someone put a definition at some appropriate place in those articles? Michael Hardy ( talk) 17:38, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Can someone else take a look at the lead of Infinity? It's gone through several changes recently and it's a balancing act between being technically correct and being common language. I suppose I lean farther towards being technically correct than towards using common language, since I think that the common language surrounding "infinity" is often be misleading (e.g. "it cannot be counted or measured even in principle").
More eyes are always welcome. — MarkH21 ( talk) 23:28, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
This is about common language. It is therefore nonsensical to try introducing mathematical accuracy. "Number" without link would be fine except that it may be confusing for people knowing of infinite numbers. So I put "common number", but I will be fine if "common" is removed. On the other hand, I am strongly against linking.D.Lazard ( talk) 23:40, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
This is an announcement that I have created an alternative account of mine: User:Math-drafts to move some of old drafts in the [[Draft:]] namespace to the subpages of that user page. While I am in control of the account, the draft pages in that user page are meant to belong to the community and all the editors should feel free to edit them as fit (including moving to mainspace or even deleting them). This alternative account itself will never make an edit.
Please let me know if there is any issue. —- Taku ( talk) 09:14, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
{{u|
Mark viking}} {
Talk}
23:57, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
Folks here may be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2019 November 10#Template:Mabs. – Deacon Vorbis ( carbon • videos) 19:19, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
For your consideration: the new article Dubner's conjecture. The Dubner in question is Harvey Dubner, the subject of an old (2007) but weakly referenced biography. Do appropriate sources exist? -- JBL ( talk) 16:18, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
See discussion at Help talk:Citation Style 1#MR numbers not rendering properly. — David Eppstein ( talk) 07:10, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi all, I have been writing the article Draft:Structural Ramsey theory, and have just submitted it for review. I have done my best to give a complete account, and provide adequate context and references. I would appreciate if anyone could give feedback and/or review.
-- Jordan Mitchell Barrett ( talk) 09:52, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
{{u|
Mark viking}} {
Talk}
11:37, 30 November 2019 (UTC)