Talk:Operad

message: Can someone add an example, please? Thanks. Jakob.scholbach 04:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Example?

message: Could the anonymous user who enters this sentence provide some indication as to _where_ the claim can be substantiated? Michiexile (talk) 20:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Operads in astronomy and bioengineering

message: Can someone please draw little boxes operads, so that the examples in this section may be rewritten in a chronological order? Twri (talk) 21:55, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Little somethings" operads 

message: Is the picture given correct?  It seems the discs for 2 and 3 are mixed up.  Any thoughts? --Jongray (talk) 18:30, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Little Somethings Operads Picture 

message: If you compare the ascii version  and line art version   you can see that the expressions "θo(θ,1)" and "θo(1,θ)"  are not converted to the line art images (last two images of the  Axiom of associativity -section). Specifically the "o"-operator is missing from the line art images. Also I don't understand what the user is trying to tell with the "o"-operator in the ascii art version. --Pasixxxx (talk) 16:18, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ascii art to line art conversion missed things at the Axiom of associativity section 

message: I am doubtful about reference .  Arxiv papers are not refereed and so we can only accept this if it by an acknowledged expert.  So who is Guillaume W. Zinbiel?  The answer appears to be that he is Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in reverse and transposed into French.  Something seems wrong here.  South Jutland County (talk) 21:36, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: See http://www.worldscibooks.com/mathematics/8222.html where it was published, and http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.0267 where it was submitted by Loday. Anne Bauval (talk) 22:11, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm confused.  Are you saying that Zinbiel is a pseudonym of Loday?  Also, publication of this in a peer reviewed source is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for inclusion.  (Though I haven't formulated an opinion one way or the other.) Sławomir Biały (talk) 23:37, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the arXiv article was uploaded by Loday (who also seems to have come up with the name "Zinbiel"), this seems likely.  To repeat what I just wrote at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics: this is not my area of mathematics, but MathSciNet has 19 publications in which the title or review include the word "Zinbiel", by a variety of authors in several languages, dating to 2002. It looks completely legitimate to me.  --Joel B. Lewis (talk) 01:09, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case, I'm satisfied.  I hadn't noticed that the paper was submitted by Loday.  Sławomir Biały (talk) 13:43, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious reference 

message: The first line under equivariance must be a typo? t is in S_n while the on the right hand side of the equation it is acting on something in P(k_1+k_2+...+k_n).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.183.81 (talk) 22:11, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, its clearly wrong. I can't figure out what the correct notation for this would be, given the current article; there'd have to be an 'abuse of notation' to fix this. linas (talk) 17:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking what May wrote in his article, he uses some abuse of notation as well. He just mentions that t acts on P(k_1+...+k_n) by shuffling indices, i.e. P(k_t(1)+...+k_t(n)). It may be worth it to mention that explicitly in the article.HSNie 15:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

text: I made an attempt at describing how "t" acts on the right hand side, as well as linked to the abuse of notation page Telestew (talk) 02:01, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Symmetric group action 

message: —  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.103.85.253 (talk) 22:45, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  etgg