User talk:Triathematician

Initial context setting

It's really inappropriate to begin a Wikipedia article by saying "Given a Lie group G,...", as if you could assume the reader is a mathematician. You need to tell the lay reader immediately that mathematics is what the article is about. I began reading an article titled schismatic temperament, and being familiar with the usual meaning of the word schismatic and the usual meaning of the word temperament, I thought maybe it was an article about a psychiatric disorder. I got all the way to the end of the first sentence without finding out otherwise. It was actually about musical tuning. I put in some introductory context-setting words "In music, ...". That's all it takes. Michael Hardy (talk) 02:57, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. Triathematician (talk) 19:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The latest version of Limits

Yes, I like your most recent version best of all. Putting the informal and non-specific description before the more specific (though still informal) description does alleviate my concern about its accuracy. Silly rabbit (talk) 18:56, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

topology

While I agree that an article intro should speak to the average reader, I strongly believe that an introduction should not make statements that are false. There are plenty of examples of topology (the donut coffee cup being the most familiar) that convey some of the feel of topology without making statements that are incorrect. Rick Norwood (talk) 12:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your comments, but I disagree. The topology article has been fairly stable for a long time, and while I am sure it can be improved, I do not think it needs a major rewrite.

When I first came to Wikipedia, I spent my first year editing articles on mathematics topics that were not currently covered in Wikipedia. Only then did I begin to work on a few of the more important articles, such as topology. Rick Norwood (talk) 12:33, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

I responded to several network-related articles you nominated for deletion. I would recommend you review the academic criteria under WP:PROF. Cheers! Madcoverboy (talk) 12:28, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trace diagrams

A former student of yours was in the mathematics section of B&N today, and he dreamed there was a book on trace diagrams. At least there's a wikipedia page on it — it just needs some work. Let's get to that in our spare time. Ancestralocean (talk) 02:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's great! Been working on it. Triathematician (talk) 12:01, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Interdisciplinary Contest in Modeling for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Interdisciplinary Contest in Modeling is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interdisciplinary Contest in Modeling until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Duckmather (talk) 04:32, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]