SciPy Reference Guide Release 1.0.0Written by the SciPy communityOctober 25, 2017 CONTENTSi ii SciPy Referen. Start studying Norman Schur's 1000 Most Important Words. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. Stack Exchange network consists of 174 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.
< Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics
name of a polyhedron[edit]
Hi! I am revising the files uploaded for Wiki Science Competition 2017 and I have noticedthis one. Such picture of the interior of a small domen will never be a finalist of course, but I am trying to improve its categorization and description like I did with other ones. It has a shape of a some regular solid, it could be the sort of image it is used in a school text book to show how geometry appears in real life, for example.
So, if you had to put a specific category related to a polyhedric shape, which one would it be in your opinion? thank you in advance.--Alexmar983 (talk) 12:07, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
RfC about the significance of properties of an integer[edit]
A Request-for-Comment has been opened at Talk:209 (number) which may be of interest to the community here. XOR'easter (talk) 20:52, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Improving 'Prime number' article towards Good Article criteria[edit]
Comments and concerns are welcome. Please join in the discussion here. Derek M (talk) 23:05, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Stereotype space?[edit]
I just ran across this article. Is that a thing? I can't seem to find much in google or google scholar that isn't authored by the user, who apparently admits COI, or isn't simply copied wiki content or print-on-demand of wiki content. There was also a discussion in the nLab forum inquiring about the notability of the topic. Is this too OR for our taste? It doesn't seem like more than one or two people have written about it. Rschwieb (talk) 14:36, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Spread in intuitionism (draft)[edit]
Could someone cast a glance over Draft:Spread(Intuitionism) and see at what level of readiness for mainspace it is. Many thanks! â Uanfala (talk) 00:36, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Derivative of limit[edit]
Strangely, I did not find any result of the form 'derivative of the limit is equal to the limit of derivatives whenever..'. Neither in real analysis nor in complex analysis. Are they really not there on Wikipedia, or did I look for them in the wrong places? (I do not mean termwise differentiation of a power series, this is too special.) Boris Tsirelson (talk) 18:42, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Topological geometry[edit]
The new article titled Topological geometry, if indeed it ought to exist, could certainly use some work. Michael Hardy (talk) 04:55, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Esotericism at Chaos theory[edit]
The IP 73.46.49.164 insists to link Interconnectedness, an article, certainly not covered by mathematical ideas, within the article Chaos theory, which has an explicit hat note, guiding to alternatives to mathematical treatment via a disambiguation page, and is of interest for WikiProject Mathematics. For to me not obvious reasons the article is also tagged with being of interest for WikiProject Religion, but I am unsure, if this should be discussed at all, and if yes, where.
I did discuss this linking already at the TP, but the IP started to insert this link again, without discussing, just claiming it were correct. Within this second effort I already reverted twice and asked for discussion again, but now I want to bring the situation there to the awareness of the project. Purgy (talk) 08:11, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Request a Review of Draft:Multivariate quadratic random number generator[edit]
Will someone please review Draft:Multivariate quadratic random number generator and advise whether it should be accepted as an article? Please remember that the acceptance criterion is not whether the draft is a Good Article, but only whether it is mathematically sound, and whether it is worth keeping as an article. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:23, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Wiki markup ce tag[edit]
In several articles, including Exact sequence, Cokernel, Snake lemma, and others, user Cedar101 has replaced, for exact sequences, the standard markup <math> by <ce> (or some variants of it), which is a markup with a uncommon syntax that he has implemented. The resulting rendering is correct, but the resulting source code in no more latex but a language that is unreadable for most of us. I have reverted him once, but, for avoiding edit warring, a consensus is needed about the use of this markup in mathematics. My opinion is that the use of <ce> is WP:disruptive editing, as it makes very time consuming to modify the involved exact sequences. But this is only my opinion, and a consensus is needed in favor or against the following assertion
D.Lazard (talk) 10:54, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Article talk page participation sought[edit]
I invite any interested editors to join this discussion about the page Linear differential equation. Loraof (talk) 17:13, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Good article nomination: Prime number[edit]
David Eppstein has recently nominated Prime number for a Good Article. I will begin reviewing the article in the next few days, but more reviewers are more than welcome! Leave your review at Talk:Prime_number/GA1. Jakob.scholbach (talk) 14:47, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Multivariable/Vector Calculus expert needed[edit]
I have for a long time thought that wikipedia's article on stokes' theorem was inadequate. The first equation of the article is completely incomprehensible to me in terms of applying it to an example. If you know anything about multivariable calculus or vector calculus please help! Brian Everlasting (talk) 20:56, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Geometry specialist needed[edit]
Please help to review Draft:Binary Tiling a very brief draft at AFC. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:57, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Focus on women mathematicians in February[edit]
--Ipigott (talk) 14:28, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Links to DAB pages[edit]
A hundred or more pages on maths-related topics link to, and have been tagged as linking to, DAB pages. Such links are of no use to anyone, especially our readers. They also get picked up by User:DPL bot for violating WP:INTDAB. I gave up maths when they started writing circles on the integral signs - which means that I know enough not to know the answer, and also enough not to guess. Can any expert help with the {{disambiguation needed}} tags on these pages, please, for starters?
If you do help solve one of those issues: take off the {{dn}} tag in the article, and add a {{done}} tick on this page. As I said, there are a hundred-plus others â I have seen them before, I will see them again on my routine trawls though Disambiguation pages with links, and I can post them in this WikiProject. You will likely get no thanks unless another WP:DPL member notices â but, in the end, all that matters is getting this encyclopaedia right. Narky Blert (talk) 03:06, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
âââââââââââââââââââââââââââ The next batch of problems which I hope that experts in this WikiProject may be able to solve. As before, search for 'disam' in the text as displayed; and if you make a fix, remove the {{dn}} tag and add {{done}} here:
Thanks in advance, Narky Blert (talk) 22:21, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
Besides
I know nothing about Arakelov, there are too many names of almost equal classes of connections around for my knowledge, and the linguistics might be simply off track. Just FYI. Purgy (talk) 08:08, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
âââââââââââââââââââââââââââ My next batch of articles which contain {{disambiguation needed}} tags needing expert attention:
As usual: thanks in advance, and mark any problem which I have listed here and which you have solved as {{done}}. Narky Blert (talk) 02:57, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Graph of empirical distribution function[edit]
If anyone's interested, there's a discussion at User talk:Loraof#Empirical distribution function about the graph used in Empirical distribution function. 14:26, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Field parameter in math rating[edit]
I have added the {{math rating}} banner to the new article Fiber product of schemes, and I have a problem with the parameter 'field': is this 'algebra' or 'geometry'? As this problem occurs for many articles, it would be better to add the possibility of 'field = algebraic geometry'. Could someone do that? D.Lazard (talk) 10:07, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
(unindent) What about the articles which (clearly) belong to algebraic geometry, will they stay in geometry or algebra or will someone move them systematically to this new category? Maybe someone could also consult Geometry guy who once invested a lot of work into the grading scheme and categorization of the articles; he might have some suggestions based on his experience with this work. Jakob.scholbach (talk) 22:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Experts in logic, to your attention[edit]
Talk:Integer sequence#Definable sequences. --Boris Tsirelson (talk) 09:55, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Need graph for Bring radical[edit]
Could someone with graphing skills please convert this table into a graph? The graph can be seen here (put there by another editor). Thanks. Loraof (talk) 20:47, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
Draft:Bivariant theory[edit]
There is a deletion discussion that can use the inputs from a third party, at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Bivariant theory -- Taku (talk) 03:12, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Real number#In physics[edit]
What about the 'slow motion edit warring' at Real number#In physics? 'This approach removes the real number system from its foundational role in physics', really? Boris Tsirelson (talk) 19:11, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Proposal at village pump on inline math[edit]
Note: There's some weird parsing error that showed up when I added <math> tags in a discussion below. Please go to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy) and search for 'Rfc: Change default <math> to be inline'. --Trovatore (talk) 02:11, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Please comment on the proposal. Thank you for your attention.--Debenben (talk) 23:03, 6 February 2018 (UTC) Controversy at Draft:Walks on ordinals, input sought[edit]
I know zero about math academic stuff, so would like to draw the attention of this WP to a draft under review: Draft:Walks on ordinals.
There are allegations that the submitter is attempting to popularize a fringe mathematical theory, which the submitter denies. Could someone more expert take a look at the draft? You can post and sign comments at the top of the draft page itself rather than its Talk, for ease of reading. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:30, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
It is definitely not a 'fringe theory', but JR is correct that it's hard to understand from the draft exactly what is being discussed. I think there's a typo in this bit:
which should read
If you understand 'ladder systems' (which I really ought to, having spent a year in Toronto, but unfortunately I never really sat down and did the work to figure them out), then I think you might be able to make sense of the text, after fixing the typo. I am not sure what the curvy arrows are about, but again, they might make sense to people who know ladder systems. --Trovatore (talk) 02:07, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
For reference: ladder systems are defined (among other places) in Section 3 of this paper. --Trovatore (talk) 02:17, 13 February 2018 (UTC) Draft:Distributional calculus[edit]
Here is another deletion discussion: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Distributional calculus. -- Taku (talk) 20:42, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Category:Pseudoconvex minimization has been nominated for discussion[edit]
Category:Pseudoconvex minimization and 2 related categories, all of which are within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) ⢠(contribs) 00:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Links to DAB pages, Part II[edit]
I'm opening this new section so as not to get in the way of archiving #Links to DAB pages. As before, (1) search for 'disam' in the article, (2) mark any problems you have solved as {{done}}, and (3) thanks in advance.
I hope that within a month I will have found and posted here every maths article which links to a DAB page â and, more importantly, that you experts will have solved those problems for the benefit of our readers. I find 'em, you fix 'em â this is going well. Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 22:17, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Several MfD discussions[edit]
Here are some new MfD discussions that might interest the members of the project.
â Taku (talk) 09:12, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
One more
â Taku (talk) 07:52, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
One more:
Proposed move[edit]
FYI:See Talk:Net (mathematics)#Move proposal.
âDeacon Vorbis (carbon ⢠videos) 18:36, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Short descriptions[edit]
I don't know how many people here use the mobile app, but it turns out that it puts helpful little snippets of text along with article titles. These are currently hosted on Wikidata. This is problematic, in part because changes to Wikidata don't show up on Wikipedians' watchlists.
For this and other reasons, the WMF has decided to add 'short descriptions' to Wikipedia articles, which will be embedded in the source of the article itself. As I understand it, the plan is that every single article will be expected to have a short description. The description is allowed to be blank, though I'm not sure why you'd want it to be.
See Wikipedia:Short description and Wikipedia:WikiProject Short descriptions for more detailed information.
The descriptions are really intended to be short. Making a long speech about a subject is not very useful in this context. The suggested limit is 40 characters, though it's a 'soft limit' â if we can't get anything useful in 40 characters, we're allowed to go over.
Some thoughts:
OK, I've yammered on long enough here. --Trovatore (talk) 22:34, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Additional thought for possibly including
Talk:Cyclic number[edit]
I've just added a ninth section to Talk:Cyclic number, I wouldn't normally post such a thing so quickly at a Wikiproject, but that talkpage has an unusual number of open and ancient queries which hopefully will be of interest here. ϢereSpielChequers 14:58, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Computational complexity[edit]
I have recently created (it existed as a dab page) Computational complexity. I need the help of the community on two points.
D.Lazard (talk) 09:54, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
Math Drafts[edit]
Excellent list created by Taku here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/List of math draft pages Thank-you. Legacypac (talk) 18:49, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Some MfD discussions[edit]
Here are some MfD discussions that might interest the members of the project.
â Taku (talk) 11:16, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Somehow related, I do have a proposal: can this project maintain the list of all math-related pages in the draftspace? One of the problems is that the draftspace is somehow invisible to the members of this project (and one of the reasons for the above MfDs is, ostensibly, to bring some attention to those drafts). Having such a list helps address this concern. â Taku (talk) 19:22, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
I can't see how a list would hurt. I've put work into several of these drafts when my attention was called to them, and I've seen at least one other editor do the same. Several drafts have been promoted to main space as a result. And if we had the full list, we could get a better sense of how many are three-word fragments that might as well be deleted, how many only need a little work to become decent main-space stubs, how many could be merged into existing articles, etc. At worst, a list would be one more thing for people who don't care to ignore. XOR'easter (talk) 16:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
Discussions about surfaces[edit]
There is a move request at Talk:Surface (mathematics) and a WP:MfD at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Surfaceââ. Both may interest members of this project. D.Lazard (talk) 20:57, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Help needed with GA nomination of Hidden Markov model[edit]
The article Hidden Markov model has been nominated for GA, and is now the second oldest unreviewed article there; it was nominated in June 2017, over eight months ago. I have been doing GA reviewing recently, including some maths articles, but would like to get someone with deeper mathematical knowledge to review this -- my maths degree is now nearly thirty years old, and this is not a topic I know anything about. Would someone here be willing to help out by reviewing the article? If someone is interested but not knowledgeable about GA reviewing I'd be glad to help out with that side of things. Thanks for any help. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:20, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Draft:Locally nilpotent derivation[edit]
(I didn't start this draft). Is this notable? -- Taku (talk) 23:35, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Draft:Level structure[edit]
This is a wrong redirect. The draft was/is about a level structure in algebraic geometry. Can someone correct it? (I can't do it myself without risking getting an indefinite ban from Wikipedia.) -- Taku (talk)
In fact, it seems I will be indef-ban after all. See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Indefinite_community_ban_for_TakuyaMurata. (I know I'm not completely blameless but still.) -- Taku (talk) 01:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
This discussion is difficult to understand. Apparently, Draft:Level structure is a draft created in June 2015 by Taku. It has be wrongly redirected by Hasteur inAugust 2017. It is only yesterday that Taku reverted this wrong redirect. This started an edit war between Taku and Hasteur, until Taku moved the draft to the main space with the name Level structure (algebraic geometry). The edit war continued about maintenance tags, this time, because Hasteur insisted to put tags about issues that are common with almost all stubs (otherwise, these would not be stubs) and thus duplicate the stub tag.After having clarified the history, I see two remaining issues:
Intrinsic flat distance[edit]
This article was at one time a draft, which was copied into mainspace several years ago but has never been assessed. It seems to me that it needs more independent references, and may have been a neologism at the time it was created. Can someone with a math background and access to academic journals fix it up and/or tag it appropriately? Thanks.âAnne Delong (talk) 10:03, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
On a related note, what about the article Christina Sormani? It has been prodded twice but survives. Is the topic notable? Mgnbar (talk) 00:12, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
On 'scheme theory'[edit]
I've seen the phrase 'scheme theory' used on wikipedia several times (e.g. in the current version of the article Main theorem of the elimination theory), and while the meaning of this term is clear, I don't think it's a conventional phrase. As more or less an algebraic geometer, I find it very quaint and nonstandard. Only the adjective 'scheme-theoretic' seems to be commonly used. To support the feeling let me remark that, unlike group theory, representation theory, number theory and others, books introducing schemes are (almost?) never titled 'scheme theory'. Here are some popular books covering schemes ([4]):
To follow the usage in the literature, I would replace 'scheme theory' by 'modern algebraic geometry', but I think D.Lazard objects to this choice, so maybe 'the language of schemes' is an OK replacement.Dpirozhkov (talk) 16:31, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
(I'm late to the party but here is my take).
-- Taku (talk) 00:59, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
Draft:Multivariate quadratic random number generator[edit]
Could someone that understands this let us know if this AfC draft is any good? Legacypac (talk) 07:40, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Category:Unary operations has been nominated for discussion[edit]
Category:Unary operations has been nominated for possible deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:55, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Draft:Data-driven control systems[edit]
There is a lot of math in Draft:Data-driven control systems. Is this page ok for mainspace? Legacypac (talk) 00:46, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Shinichi Mochizuki[edit]1000 Most Important Words Norman Schur Pdf Merger
There is a discussion at the conflict of interest noticeboard which could benefit from input from editors with mathematics knowledge. Please see the discussion for details. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:44, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Stephens' constant[edit]
The new article titled Stephens' constant is something of mess. It doesn't have a proper introductory section nor a proper opening sentence, nor does does it say enough to make it clear why the topic is notable. And it could use copy-editing of a number of different sorts. Michael Hardy (talk) 20:39, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
abc and 'Inter-universal Teichmüller theory'[edit]
I recently had a look at the page on Shinichi Mochizuki's Inter-universal Teichmüller theory and found it to have several problems. First it is far from having a neutral point of view (the most flagrant example of this being the complete omission of the fact that very few mathematicians accept Mochizuki's idea to say the least, as illustrated for example by this blog post: https://galoisrepresentations.wordpress.com/2017/12/17/the-abc-conjecture-has-still-not-been-proved/ and the discussion following it). Second (perhaps this point is more my personal impression) it has no discernable mathematical content and is basically useless as an introduction to the theory as far as I am concerned.
I think that the page as it stands should not exist on Wikipedia. On the other hand it seems to me that mentioning IUT on Wikipedia is important, and I'd like to suggest the following to take care of this in what I believe is a better way:
I think this is a rather touchy subject (witness some discussions on blog comments, eg. here: https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=9871) and this is why a discussion here might be needed. jraimbau (talk) 15:59, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
User:Primefac perhaps some page protection is in order, like 30/500 to weekld out all the SPAs noted. Legacypac (talk) 00:17, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |