Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/Archive/2005/Aug

message: I find Other_names_of_large_numbers a rather dubious article. Google will only find a lot of the names here inside this article. --R.Koot 00:02, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: hmm, it does seem pretty arbitrary --MarSch 17:57, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

text: I concur --  Arthur Rubin 22:13, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other_names_of_large_numbers 

message: Blahtex is a new LaTeX to MathML converter designed specifically for MediaWiki.
More information is available at m:Blahtex.
At the blahtex download page may be found an interactive demo, samples of equations from Wikipedia, and the source code.
I invite everyone to participate in the discussion on how on earth to make MathML work in MediaWiki.
This message will be cross-posted on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) and on the Wikitech-l mailing list (as soon as I figure out how it works).
Cheers Dmharvey Talk 13:37, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  blahtex version 0.2 released 

message: This isn't strictly an issue for this project, but I thought it was about such a fundamental part of Wikipedia that it should be widely publicized. It concerns the Vfd process (and as it turns out this page has been involved in several VfDs recently). There has been considerable recent discussion about possibly eliminating VfD see:
*An RFC about the recent deletion of the VfD page (since undeleted): Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Deletion of VFD.
*A vote and discussion on the deletion of the VfD page: Wikipedia:Requests for deletion.
Paul August ☎ 15:19, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
:Ongoing discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion reform and its subpages; my proposal is on Wikipedia:Deletion reform/Proposals/Speedy redirect Septentrionalis 01:29, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of VfD 

message: Looking for something to do? WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles has made a list of missing science topics, containing articles on Weisstein's MathWorld that have no corresponding Wikipedia article. There are more than ten thousand entries (but a considerable number is due to different capitalization conventions), including the intriguing Algebra of Chinese Characters (unfortunately, it is just an empty article on MathWorld). On a side note, remember that there is also the PlanetMath exchange. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 22:39, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ten thousand articles waiting to be written ... 

message: Blahtex 0.2.1 has been released. It now compiles and runs on Linux thanks to Jitse Niesen.
Jitse has had some initial success with integrating blahtex into mediawiki: check it out.
Source code, online demo and samples here.
More info and bug reports at m:Blahtex.
Dmharvey Talk 01:53, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  blahtex: now compiles on linux 

message: I was editing the *-algebra, B*-algebra, C*-algebra etc. pages for consistency of style and I noticed some pages had  tags around the * in these expressions, thus giving (e.g.) C* rather than C*.  This looks horrible (and increases leading) on my browser (Netscrape 7) and the majority of pages didn't have it, so I took out those I found.  But I assume someone had a reason for putting them in: is there any browser for which this looks better?  Our proposed style guide should address this one way or the other.  (This is different from the superscripting issues discussed at Wikipedia:How to write a Wikipedia article on Mathematics already because it relies on the * character appearing superscripted by default.)
And while I'm here:  our preferred spelling seems to be C*-algebra (not C* algebra, C-star algebra, C star algebra, etc.)  The exception is that our page on *-algebras is currently at star-algebra.  Is there any reason for this, for example, is it usually spelled this way in the literature?  —Blotwell 04:58, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style: *-algebras 

message: * Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Hyper_generalized_orthogonal_Lie_algebra --R.Koot 03:45, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  I found this on VfD 

message: Over at the Talk:Space#On arranging stuff in this article page there's a discussion about whether the section on Mathematics and space could be rewritten to contain a brief summary of how space works in maths, as at the moment it is pretty much a list of links.  Could someone take a look at Space, which it is hoped will be a big picture article taking in the various uses of the concept of space, and see if work can be done on the Mathematics and space section. Thanks for any help or thoughts. Hiding  talk 07:58, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mathematics and space 

message: I created :Category:Mathematician Wikipedians as a subcategory in :Category:Wikipedians by profession and categorized myself in there. Company is welcome. :) Oleg Alexandrov 23:28, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What about :Category:Wikipedian mathematicians? --R.Koot 23:56, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

text: If anybody is willing to go through mathematicians user's pages and add them to one or the other category, I will not mind. :) Oleg Alexandrov 01:28, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Do you think that the others would? I think a directory is a great idea but perhaps the listing should be voluntary. Or maybe you could just leave someone a note on their talk page when you have added them (to give them the option to be unlisted). What do you think? --Kooky | Talk 19:13, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  To rephrase myself, if anybody is willing to go through mathematicians talk pages and mention to them about one or the other category, I will not mind. :) Oleg Alexandrov 19:56, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Category:Wikipedian mathematicians also fits better with :Category:Wikipedians by profession.  My vote is with Septentrionalis.  I've added Wikipedian mathematicians to :Category:Wikipedians by profession, so at least it is now obvious there are two conflicting page titles. --stochata 20:05, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Don't know about you folks, but my profession seems to change every few years. (Three years ago, I was a "businessman". Now I'm an "engineer".) Classification by areas of interest, past and/or present, might be more accurate than whatever  (non-)career is one is fated to, given the caprecious winds of the economy and slipperiness of the rungs of the social climbing ladder.  linas 21:31, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

text: stochata, thanks. It seems there is a likelyhood both categories will be deleted, so you could go vote on that. Oleg Alexandrov 16:08, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Mathematician Wikipedians 

message: I would like to announce that I have nominated Jitse for adminship, and I am here shamelessly encouraging everyone to vote (in support I hope ;-). To vote or comment go here: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jitse Niesen. — Paul August ☎ 16:58, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:Paul's nomination was successful, so I have now access to the admin tools. Thanks to everybody for voting. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:28, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Jitse, shouldn't you update your blurb in the participants list to reflect your newly elevated status? ---CH  (talk) 00:04, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Announcing Jise's RfA 

message: I've been trying to improve on what Maynard Handley did with the PNGs.
There are still severe problems (mostly relating to Windows), and it's not good enough for deployment, but I think it's starting to get somewhere, and I'd appreciate some opinions.
Check out User:Dmharvey/Inline_PNG_discussion.
Dmharvey Talk 17:15, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  more about improving inline PNGs 

message: Could an admin move Menelaus theorem to Menelaus' theorem?  Note that the page's principal author User:Tokek has left a note on talk:Menelaus theorem regarding the choice of title, but as I read it it doesn't seem that Tokek would find this change objectionable. —Blotwell 06:57, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I did it. Now Menelaus theorem is a redirect to Menelaus' theorem.  Hope that was a correct move. --Zero 08:28, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: I have a question/problem/something-I-don't-understand that has been bugging me for years. I have posted it at the bottom of Talk:Infinity. Thank you already to Paul August. --Lord Voldemort (Dark Mark) 17:20, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can more people help me out? 

message: There have been some rather strange edits to Galois theory in the last few weeks, all emanating from IP address 64.136.26.235, just deletions of large random chunks of text. What is especially odd is that this IP address appears to be making genuine edits to other articles. Any ideas? Dmharvey Talk 18:49, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the IP address of a cache server fom United Online, so is most likely used by a lot of different users. --R.Koot 18:58, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  weird vandalism 

message: Take a look at Tav (number). Is this valid? Salvageable? The original article is credited to an IP (which has no other math-related edits), and subsequent edits by others have left the basic text unchanged. Obviously, this article needs either a rewrite or deletion. — Nowhither 13:50, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It has a valid basis but is so poorly written as to be incomprehensible.  See the footnote on page 3 of this Postscript document. Here is Tav:  ת --Zero 14:11, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Tav (number)" article 

message: The notations used by the cluster of articles close to sigma-algebra are inconsistent with one-another; I'd like to fix this, but only after some agreement on a unified notation. Please see Talk:Sigma-algebra for details. linas 13:58, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Talk:Sigma-algebra]] 

message: I've just made a comment on the category deletion pages for :Category:Mathematician Wikipedians about a Math version of the Babel project.  Then I realised it's actually only an extension of the Babel project.  Below are some sample categories for discussion, and we could make up a pretty box template like the babblers:
* Math native speaker of math.  This person works as a math professor or similar role in industry.
* Math-N near-native speaker of math.  This person is either engaged in a math doctorate, or works where a very high level of math is required e.g. as a physicist, etc.
* Math-3 very high level of math.  Works where a high level of math is involved (e.g., actuary, computer science, etc), or is engaged in a higher level degree in math, physics or other math related subject.
* Math-2 has taken or is taking an undergraduate degree, in math, physics or other math related subject.
* Math-1 basic mathematical ability and literacy.  Typically working in an environment where an understanding of math or logic is desirable, such as an accountant.
If we preferred it could be a proper equivalent of Babel, where statisticians, applied mathematicians and pure mathematicians have their own boxes, and people like me can be Pure Math-1! --stochata 11:12, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure I like this fine level classification. OK, if one wishes to do that, one could. But those Babel thing are ugly and take a lot of room on the page. Oleg Alexandrov 16:10, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The only problem I have with that classification is that it doesn't distinguish different types of math-nativeness. For example, I might be classified as "native" myself, but when it comes to articles on algebraic topology, numerical analysis, several complex variables, or any number of other topics, my understanding is really probably somewhere between Math-3 and Math-N at most. In other words, a lot of the time, the level would depend on the particular subject itself. Revolver 21:52, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think those categories are setting the bar too high. After all, we don't make up separate categories for "native speaker of english", "native speaker, additionally is studying english literature at PhD level", and "native speaker, additionally teaches english literature and phonics at university level". I think what you have as "Math-3" is the highest level I would be willing to categorise on babel. After that there are just too many problems with specialised areas, as Revolver notes. Dmharvey Talk 22:10, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I did wonder about the height of the bar, especially as compared with "native speaker of English" (which covers perhaps 300 million+ people), as opposed to perhaps a few thousand math professors in higher education.  However, sometimes I feel it is worth knowing that X is actually a math professor, rather than a doctoral student.  I also agree that specialised subdomains complicate thing.  I would also be Math-3 (alternatively, Graph Theory-N, Number Theory-1, Statistics-2) under this classification, but then I do feel that others are better qualified than me, and would appreciate knowing who is who (and would also like other editors to know that my math isn't always 100%, and needs checking). --stochata 12:33, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A math(s) professor may advertise themselves as such on their user page without a babel notice, if they so choose. Perhaps what you really want is a "Mathematical Wikipedians, classified by area of specialisation" page. The difficulty is that often people categorise themselves too high because they don't know any better. For example, there would be a fair few high school students who would describe themselves as accomplished in "geometry and algebra", despite not knowing the first thing about what real mathematicians in these areas actually do. Dmharvey Talk 12:54, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Math Babel 

message: As part of working on categorizing articles copied from PlanetMath — the PlanetMath Exchange project, I noticed that there might be a need for more math categories from subjects listed in the Mathematics Subject Classification (2000 edition). Here's the categories I have in mind:
# :Category:associative rings and algebras as subcategory in :Category:Abstract algebra, as per MSC 16-xx, Associative rings and algebras
# :Category:nonassociative rings and algebras as subcategory in :Category:Abstract algebra, as per MSC 17-xx, Nonassociative rings and algebras
# :Category:Difference equations and  :Category:functional equations as subcategories in :Category:Equations, as per MSC 39-xx, Difference and functional equations
# :Category:Global analysis and :Category:analysis on manifolds, subcategories in ???, as per MSC 58-xx, Global analysis, analysis on manifolds
# :Category:Sequences, subcategory in :Category:Mathematics, as per MSC 40-xx, Sequences, series, summability
# :Category:Mathematical biology as subcategory in both :Category:Mathematics and in :Category:Biology, as per MSC 92-xx, Biology and other natural sciences
I am aware that the Mathematics Subject Classification is not directly applicable to Wikipedia math articles, still, probably it can give some inspiration. I am most uneasy about the global analysis and analysis on manifolds thing. Any suggestions and discussion of the above are very welcome. Oleg Alexandrov 22:57, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Category:Nonassociative algebra would be good. Nobody can remember categories A&B, so let's not have any more. :Category:Global analysis was 'big in the 1960s' but I think should probably not be used here - cover by means of other ones (possibly one on infinite-dimensional manifolds, one day). :Category:associative rings and algebras is really just ring theory, which we have. Charles Matthews 09:45, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Charles, should it be :Category:Nonassociative algebras, meaning plural? Oleg Alexandrov 15:36, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

text: So: :Category:associative rings and algebras can be just replaced with :Category:Ring theory, and probably :Category:Difference equations and  :Category:functional equations are premature, with :Category:Equations being enough. However, I would argue though for creating :Category:Sequences. It could contain as subcategories :Category:integer sequences and :Category:mathematical series. Any comments on this? Oleg Alexandrov 01:54, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New math categories 

message: There is an interesting thread at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Math equations to plain english. Oleg Alexandrov 19:02, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Math equations to plain english 

message: Based on the feedback above, I created a table listing how Wikipedia categories are in correspondence with the AMS Mathematics Subject Classification. Again, this is needed for automatic categorization of articles imported from PlanetMath but would be a curious thing to look at in general. See link at User:Mathbot/Wikipedia categories and AMS MSC classification. Any feedback welcome. Oleg Alexandrov 23:22, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you not aware of areas of mathematics?  My only complaint is that it links to articles, when I think it should link to categories.  The other complain is a lack of the next level of detail: at one point, I attempted to also add a list of categories corresponding to subcats of MSC 11, but was rebuffed. linas 04:12, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am aware of that list, and it was very helpful in compiling my list of categories. No, I would not think that page should link to categories — linking to the article is more informative, and from there the link to category is one click away. But maybe a wider discussion is needed on this. Oleg Alexandrov 04:56, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map between AMS math articles classfication and Wikipedia categories 

message: There is a discussion going at Talk:Boolean algebra about rewriting it, or perhaps writing a new article. Several people think the article is too technical and difficult to understand, and User:Plugwash (who says he doesn't understand the current article at all) has made an attempt at rewriting it & mdash; that has been reverted (by me!). Please join in the discussion ;-) Paul August ☎ 17:12, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
:I've concluded that the article for mathematicians (the current one) needs to be separated from the article for non-mathematicians, which I wrote and placed under Boolean logic.  It may need to be moved again, though, as I am getting considerable complaints from PhDs over it's placement there. StuRat 19:45, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite of [[Boolean algebra]], or new article?