Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nuvola apps edu mathematics.png
This is a discussion page for
WikiProject Mathematics
This page is devoted to discussions of issues relating to mathematics articles on Wikipedia. Related discussion pages include:
Please add new topics at the bottom of the page and sign your posts.
Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Information.svg To view an explanation to the answer, click on the [show] link to the right of the question.
          A Wikipedia ad has been created for this project page

List of all archives

2009: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec
2010: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec
2011: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec
2012: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec
2013: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec
2014: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec
2015: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec
2016: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec
2017: Jan · Feb · Mar · Apr · May · Jun · Jul · Aug · Sep · Oct · Nov · Dec

call for abstracts

Posting this here since it would be great if someone could come along and talk about Wikipedia's mathematical culture.

CALL FOR ABSTRACTS (deadline: 30th June 2017)

ENABLING MATHEMATICAL CULTURES, University of Oxford, 5th-7th December 2017

This workshop celebrates the completion of the EPSRC-funded project “Social Machines of Mathematics”, led by Professor Ursula Martin at the University of Oxford. We will present research arising from the project, and bring together interested researchers who want to build upon and complement our work. We invite interested researchers from a broad range of fields, including: Computer Science, Philosophy, Sociology, History of Mathematics and Science, Argumentation theory, and Mathematics Education. Through such a diverse mix of disciplines we aim to foster new insights, perspectives and conversations around the theme of Enabling Mathematical Cultures.

Our intention is to build upon previous events in the “Mathematical Cultures” series. These conferences explored diverse topics concerning the socio-cultural, historical and philosophical aspects of mathematics. Our workshop will, likewise, explore the social nature of mathematical knowledge production, through analysis of historical and contemporary examples of mathematical practice. Our specific focus will be on how social, technological and conceptual tools are developed and transmitted, so as to enable participation in mathematics, as well as the sharing and construction of group knowledge in mathematics. In particular, we are interested in the way online mathematics, such as exhibited by the Polymath Projects, MathOverflow and the ArXiv, enable and affect the mathematical interactions and cultures.

We hereby invite the submission of abstracts of up to 500 words for papers to be presented in approximately 30 minutes (plus 10 minutes Q+A). The Enabling Mathematical Cultures workshop will have space on Days 2 and 3 of the meeting for a number of accepted talks addressing the themes of social machines of mathematics, mathematical collaboration, mathematical practices, ethnographic or sociological studies of mathematics, computer-assisted proving, and argumentation theory as applied in the mathematical realm. Please send your abstracts to [email protected] by the deadline of the 30th June 2017.

The event takes place in the Mathematical Institute of the University of Oxford on 5th, 6th and 7th December 2017, with a dinner on 5th December and an informal supper on 6th December.

The focus of Day 1 will be on success, failure and impact of foundational research with an emphasis on history and long term development. Days 2 and 3 will focus on studies of contemporary and prospective mathematical cultures from sociological, philosophical, educational and computational perspectives.

Confirmed speakers include: Andrew Aberdein, Michael Barany, Alan Bundy, Joe Corneli, Matthew Inglis, Lorenzo Lane, Ursula Martin, Dave Murray-Rust, Alison Pease and Fenner Tanswell.

Organising Committee: Ursula Martin, Joe Corneli, Lorenzo Lane, Fenner Tanswell, Sarah Baldwin, Brendan Larvor, Benedikt Loewe, Alison Pease

Further information will be added to the website at

Previous "Mathematical Cultures" events can be found here: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arided (talkcontribs)

More eyes needed

Sharaf al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī, father of algebraic geometry - really??? --Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 21:10, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

List of mathematics competitions

Hello, folks. Last year, I proposed that the listing in the above-named article be drastically reduced, by removing all competitions that haven't been shown to be notable. That proposal is at Talk:List of mathematics competitions#Indiscriminate list. No comments were received. I'm prepared to take action now on this, but will be happy to receive comments from this WikiProject before doing so. NewYorkActuary (talk) 03:25, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, please go ahead. None of the sources listed in the footnotes there look particularly significant or worthwhile, so my suggestion would be to keep all of and only the bluelinked entries. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:34, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Lobachevsky integral formula

Lobachevsky integral formula might bear examination. Or might not? Michael Hardy (talk) 02:41, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Gaussian integer

An edit war seems start at Gaussian integer. See also Talk:Gaussian integer. Other opinions are strongly needed. D.Lazard (talk) 13:38, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Contravariant and Covariant Vectors

I have made a couple of entries on the talk page, but nobody seems interested and there has not been much article edit activity for a while. Could somebody have a look at the article and assess whether it needs attention. My opinion is that it could benefit from a thorough rewrite. The content is good, but wordy and disorganised, and the notation slightly distracting. I am prepared to put in some effort, but I don't want to stir up a hornets nest.Foucault (talk) 16:38, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

You mean Covariance and contravariance of vectors. Boris Tsirelson (talk) 16:54, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Thankyou. I wrote this as an afterthought, when I was about to go to bed - 230am.Foucault (talk) 17:00, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Note: I have reverted the edit and left a message at the article page. - DVdm (talk) 08:37, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Geometry of an algebraic curve

I hope someone has an idea for what to do with this page. It reads like the backs of several envelopes. The title does not appear to be suitable (the material is much more narrow and esoteric than the title suggests, IMO); but before a better title can be chosen, the content needs clarification. XOR'easter (talk) 23:07, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

It doesn’t really seem like an article on anything, just a collection of snippets on some topic, not necessarily the topic given by the title which seems too vague. I see this was raised on the talk page but was rejected with a "so fix it" argument, but with no proposal how it could actually be fixed and I don’t think it can be. AfD perhaps?--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:50, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
WP:BLAR to algebraic geometry, maybe? —David Eppstein (talk) 23:56, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
That makes sense. The page history is still there for anyone who thinks they can do something with it. But as-is better a redirect until that happens.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds 23:59, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
A redirect to algebraic geometry sounds good to me. XOR'easter (talk) 00:27, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Move back to the draftspace: I still think moving it back to the draftspace makes the most sense. There, it should be possible to work out what materials should belong to the draft with the current title. The error was to move it to the mainspace. The redirect makes little sense since it doesn't lead anywhere (i.e., people cannot work on it.) -- Taku (talk) 03:09, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
About the title. "Geometry" is there to compare it to arithmetic of algebraic curves, another important topic. -- Taku (talk) 03:11, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
I disagree with redirecting to algebraic geometry: almost everything in the article could be merged into Algebraic curve, and "Geometry of algebraic curves" refers clearly to algebraic curves, the first word being somehow a pleonasm. Thus I'll be bold and modify the redirect. D.Lazard (talk) 08:57, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Oppose back to draft space: The move was already debated. I would note that this would not be the first, second, third, or fourth time that Taku has tried to leverage this back into draft space to try and escape generally accepted operating procedures. IF the page can be improved, it can be done as a subsection of a larger article until such time that WP:SPINOFF becomes a useful solution to the parent article having too much content. Hasteur (talk) 23:10, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
It seems clear from the above that the move of the draft page to the mainspace didn't make sense. So the obvious solution is to undo that. -- Taku (talk) 00:11, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Please Review my Article

I wrote an article on geometric mixed motives and I would like to have a mathematician on this site to review it. It was previously revoked by a non-mathematician, but their criterion for revoking the article is invalid: the sources I provided are notable. In addition, I made sure to cite other articles on wikipedia and gave detailed explanations on the page. Any help is appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

Maybe these could help: "Geometric Mixed-Motives". Apparently not a huge subject, but the chances of approval increase considerably if you cite peer-reviewed publications. The sources you gave are, by definition, not notable or reliable. This has nothing to do with the meaning of the terms in the real world. YohanN7 (talk) 16:09, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Why is the handbook of K-theory or the journal of K-theory not notable? One is published through Springer and the other is a peer-reviewed journal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)
I have answered in the draft's talk page. D.Lazard (talk) 18:38, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
These are notable, however, up until yesterday they were so poorly referenced that this fact was hidden. You have to realize that in writing for an encyclopedia you can not assume that readers and even editors are going to be familiar with the perfectly good sources in your subfield. The publication data is needed to establish that these sources have been vetted by the mathematical community–just providing the links to these sources does not give that information. As I looked over your article I also noticed another problem that you will have. There are no in-line citations. The sources that you provide are meant to support the statements made in the article. Without the in-line links to the sources (including page numbers) the statements you make can not be verified by a reader and that is the heart of what Wikipedia is all about. If you keep at it this article will eventually be in good enough shape to be accepted. --Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 18:40, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

RfC: Should the WP:TALK guideline discourage interleaving?

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines#RfC: Should the guideline discourage interleaving? #2. A permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:41, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Calculators and software in external links

I tend to be a bit fussy with external links and I see a lot of calculators in elementary articles (which I tend to remove) and software, either working programs or code, in CS articles (which I tend to leave alone hoping that someone else will deal with it). My feeling is that these things are not in the spirit of proper external links and they can usually be snagged on the basis of not being reliable sources. However, it would be nice (I think) if there was an explicit point addressing this issue on the list at WP:ELNO. Before proposing anything to a wider audience I thought that I would first like to gather the reactions of the members of this project, since it would affect us the most. If an outright ban is not in order then maybe some guidelines as to what would be acceptable could be given. Thanks for your consideration. --Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 23:13, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA