|
|
| (646 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown) |
| Line 22: |
Line 22: |
| | [[Special:Version]]. This collection may be updated and extended. | | [[Special:Version]]. This collection may be updated and extended. |
| | | | |
| − | ==Comments== | + | == Archives == |
| − | '''Please add comments and/or suggestions here:'''
| |
| | | | |
| − | This is a useful page, but it should be more visible. Maybe the navigation toolbar should contain it (among "main page", ..., "help"). --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 08:14, 14 December 2011 (CET)
| + | Discussions older than year 2020 have been moved to |
| − | :I have added a link to this page on the [[Help:Contents]] page. [[User:Nbrothers|Nathan Brothers]] 17:28, 16 December 2011 (EST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | <hr />
| + | [[Talk:EoM:This project/Archive 1]] |
| | | | |
| − | The footer "How to Cite this Entry" is appropriate for articles, but probably not for user pages etc. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 15:05, 14 December 2011 (CET)
| + | ==Comments== |
| − | | + | '''Please add comments and suggestions as a new section below.''' |
| − | :I have transmitted your proposals to the admins. [[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 22:44, 14 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | <hr />
| |
| − | | |
| − | I rewrote [[Measurable space]]; please look. In particular, in the bibliography I gave links to MathSciNet (following a suggestion by Ulf Rehmann); but for now they use my private template [[User:Boris Tsirelson/MR]]; if you like it, please move it into [[Template:MR]] (with needed changes, if any). --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 21:43, 20 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | : Ok, I have made MR a global template and have added a ZBL template as well, see [[Measurable space]]. --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 22:53, 21 December 2011 (CET) Same for [[Tamagawa number]] --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 00:38, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :: Good news: even working with no subscriptions, clicking a Zbl link I still get a review, in contrast to an MR link <small>(MR says: "For users without a MathSciNet license, Relay Station allows linking from MR numbers in online mathematical literature directly to electronic journals and original articles. Subscribers receive the added value of full MathSciNet reviews.)"</small>.
| |
| − | :::That corresponds to Zbl's policy: They do allow up to three requests even to non subscribers. --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 10:40, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | :: Bad news: even working with an MSC subscription (via my university), clicking a Subject Classification link I get:
| |
| − | :::A username and password are being requested by <nowiki>http://ams.math.uni-bielefeld.de</nowiki>. The site says: "MathSciNet Authentication".
| |
| − | :: --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 10:13, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | :::That is different here: Under a vpn connection I do get access -- even from my home notebook, and I can switch on and off that access by using or not using vpn (as it should happen). But: after switching on, I have to reload the EoM page before my browser realizes that access is given.--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 10:40, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | :: And still, the MSC template is not good for primary-only cases, because the "ParserFunctions" extension is missing. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 10:21, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | :::Unfortunately that is true. An updated software version which should fix this hopefully will be installed in early January. --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 18:44, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | :::Here is an MSC template which works correctly, but without #if clause: [[User:Rehmann/sandbox/MSC]] --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 00:33, 7 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::Wow! --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 08:16, 7 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::MSCwiki links added to help non MSN supported readers (not perfect for secondary MSC)--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 14:10, 7 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ===Our readers=== | |
| − | It seems, most of EoM articles are targeted at graduate math students and professional mathematicians; but some are accessible to an interested layman. I try to collect these; for now, starting on "A", "B". --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 10:36, 14 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ------------------
| |
| − | [[Absolute value]]
| |
| − | + [[Additivity]]
| |
| − | + [[Algebra]]
| |
| − | + [[Algebra, fundamental theorem of]]
| |
| − | + [[Algebra of sets]]
| |
| − | + [[Analytic geometry]]
| |
| − | + [[Arabic numerals]]
| |
| − | + [[Arithmetic mean]]
| |
| − | + [[Arithmetic root]]
| |
| − | + [[Assertion]]
| |
| − | + [[Associativity]]
| |
| − | + [[Axiomatic method]]
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[Ball]]
| |
| − | + [[Bayes formula]]
| |
| − | + [[Bell inequalities]]
| |
| − | + [[Benford law]]
| |
| − | + [[Bernoulli experiment]]
| |
| − | + [[Bernoulli random walk]]
| |
| − | + [[Bertrand paradox]]
| |
| − | + [[Binary tree]]
| |
| − | + [[Binomial distribution]]
| |
| − | + [[Bit]]
| |
| − | ----------------------------
| |
| − | | |
| − | Should we introduce (two or more) levels, and mark articles accordingly? --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 11:17, 15 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :I am not sure. Maybe it is good to just have a list (category) of articles which are suited for non professionals, in order to attract such readers. --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 13:21, 15 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Preferred style=== | |
| − | Many articles have (near the end) the section "Comments" (and often
| |
| − | also the second "References" section after "Comments"). What does it
| |
| − | mean? And should we follow this pattern when editing and creating
| |
| − | articles? --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 11:22, 15 December
| |
| − | 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :This is due to the history of the encylopaedia. It underwent various (print and electronic) editions, which not always resulted in a rewrite of an article, but just in an update by amending a comment (sometimes there are several, each with its own reference list). There is no need to follow this pattern now since wikipedia does allow better ways of updating.--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 13:21, 15 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :: For some pages, it may be advisable to split them, or to at least introduce significant section titles. E.g., the page [[Hilbert theorem]] has 8 'references' sections, similarly the page [[Duality]]. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 21:01, 7 March 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::: On Wikipedia, in such cases as "Hilbert theorem" and "Duality" one usually makes a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation disambiguation page] and several articles. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 22:10, 7 March 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::: Certainly. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 23:09, 7 March 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::: Yes, this is one possibility to resolve these things, however this concept should be applied with care. Not every section deserves a single page, some are closely related, and it may be more illustrative e.g., to leave all sections of [[Singular point]] describing some singularities on algebraic varieties in one page, but separating the initial section about singular points of functions in another, as well as the parts on differential equations. Nevertheless: Separating things possibly may obscure otherwise obvious similarities, which to observe could give a deeper understanding. -- A practical problem with these pages is that the reference descriptors are not unique, so '[2]' may refer to different reference sources, depending on where it is used in the article. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 00:25, 8 March 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::::: In such cases the top page can be used to give a (brief) survey pointing to separate pages where the individual cases are treated in more detail (including the references). This will help readers to find the information they are looking for -- either it is the survey they need, or they go to the specific topic to learn more. Long pages are not so convenient to browse on the screen (at least for my taste). --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 02:06, 8 March 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::::: Ok, maybe this one will become your favoured: [[Serial scheme]]. :) --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 13:30, 8 March 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ----
| |
| − | ----
| |
| − | I guess, some day the use of our new templates will become a part of recommendations posted on our help pages. Here is another question of style.
| |
| − | | |
| − | I observe a typical pattern in the existing articles: the title, mentioning a notion, is immediately continued by the definition of the notion. Sometimes a slanted text in between gives some context or some synonims.
| |
| − | | |
| − | :I propose to use a definition style using a complete sentence with predicate consisting of copula+predicative, as this is common in (written) English. Synonyms could be given, maybe after a prefix "also:" and with an extra page for that synonym referencing to the actual page.Context extensions of some notion should be given within the text, if there is no need to distinguish against other uses of that notion, in which case a disambiguation page should be used. See below my suggestions.--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 19:43, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | Examples:
| |
| − | | |
| − | :'''Binary relation'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | :<nowiki>A two-place [[Predicate|predicate]] on a given set.</nowiki>
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::''Preferable:'' <nowiki>A binary relation is a two-place [[Predicate|predicate]] on a given set.</nowiki>--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 19:43, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :'''Spectral density'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | :''of a stationary stochastic process or of a homogeneous random field in n-dimensional space''
| |
| − | | |
| − | :<nowiki>The [[Fourier transform|Fourier transform]] of the covariance function
| |
| − | of a stochastic process which is stationary in the wide sense</nowiki>...
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::''Preferable:'' In this article, the spectral density of a stationary stochastic process or of a homogeneous random field in n-dimensional space is described.--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 19:43, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :'''Inter-quantile width'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | :''inter-quantile distance, inter-quantile range''
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::''Preferable:'' Also: ''inter-quantile distance, inter-quantile range'' --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 19:43, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :<nowiki>The difference between the lower and upper quantiles of the same level (cf. [[Quantile|Quantile]]).</nowiki>
| |
| − | | |
| − | But in rare cases the definition appears much later (as in [[Berwald connection]]).
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::Maybe here a link to the text part giving the formal definition could be placed under the title.--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 19:43, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | On Wikipedia the pattern of the beginning is different: the title is not a part of the definition; an example:
| |
| − | | |
| − | :'''Binary relation'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | :<nowiki>In [[mathematics]], a '''binary relation on''' a [[set (mathematics)|set]] ''A'' is a collection of [[ordered pair]]s of elements of ''A''.</nowiki>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Thus, what is our preferred style for the start of an article? --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 17:28, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::Since our language is English, we should use full sentences for definitions, as said above.--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 19:43, 23 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Subject classification===
| |
| − | What I find more important is to classify articles by [http://www.ams.org/mathscinet/msc/conv.html?from=2010 MSC (Mathematical Subject Classification)] and possibly categorize them according to that. This classification should be done so that it is easily recognizable by bots collecting bibliographic info. Of course MSC is subject to change over time, and there should be a tool to update such a classification easily over the whole collection. (We are lucky, since such a change did just happen via MSC 2000 --> MSC 2010.) Does anybody know if there exist wikimedia extensions which do support a suitable classification (and possibly its update)?--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 13:21, 15 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :For now I added MSC codes to our [[Special:Categories|categories]]. It will be much easier to update categories than all articles. About bots collecting bibliographic info, I have no idea. But probably a template can help. Do you know which text should appear on articles to this end? [[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 20:51, 15 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::Some html meta tag would do the job like
| |
| − | ::::<meta name="description" content="2010 Mathematics Subject Classifiction 20-XXX" />
| |
| − | ::and
| |
| − | ::::<meta name="keywords" content="associative algebras, Galois theory, ..." />.
| |
| − | ::But I think that ought to be done on a pagewise basis. --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 12:47, 17 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :::As an experiment, I added "<nowiki><meta name="keywords" content="probability" /></nowiki>" to the end of "[[Probability]]"; it is invisible, but appears on the generated html as "<p><span class="tex2jax_ignore"><nowiki><meta name="keywords" content="probability" /></nowiki></span></p>". Will it do the job? --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 16:39, 17 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::It seems one cannot put some <meta> tag outside the <body> section of some wiki page (unless there is some wikimedia extension wich helps??). So maybe you just omit the <meta ... /> tag. But apparently at the time being, Google's bots don't visit the EoM pages at all.--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 19:33, 25 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :::::Not quite so. I just took an old article (not "Measurable space", this is too recent), asked Google for "interest in abstract differential equations is that the so-called mixed problems" and got the first answer: "Differential equation, abstract - Encyclopedia of Mathematics". --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 21:13, 25 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::::Too slow. On [http://www.math.uni-bielefeld.de/lag my preprint server], articles are recognized by google within a few days.--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 21:49, 25 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | :::::::It is rumored that Google, seeing a new page, returns to it after some days; if it is changed, Google treats it as volatile, and visits frequently; otherwise it does not. But anyway, (a) I doubt we can hope for a high Google rank, and (b) I doubt we can have many visitors. Just because mathematicians are a small population. Students are a larger population, but these are not our readers, I guess. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 23:04, 25 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::::::But (a),(b) are true for my preprint server as well... --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 23:35, 25 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | ===Categories===
| |
| − | Concerning categorization I propose to use the sectioning scheme used by the International Congresses of Mathematicians as shown below (I have added the respective two digit MSC codes - please amend/correct):
| |
| − | | |
| − | {| class="wikitable" cellspacing="0" style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto;"
| |
| − | ! colspan="2" | ICM sectioning scheme, cf. [http://www.icm2010.in/scientific-program/imu-sections ICM 2010]
| |
| − | ! scope="col" | Corresponding [http://msc2010.org/mscwiki/index.php?title=MSC2010 MSC 2010 two digit codes]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 1.|| [[:Category:Logic and foundations]] || {{C|03}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 2. || [[:Category:Algebra]] || {{C|06}},{{C|08}},{{C|12}},{{C|13}},{{C|15}},{{C|16}},{{C|17}},{{C|18}},{{C|19}},{{C|20}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 3. || [[:Category:Number theory]] || {{C|11}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 4. || [[:Category:Algebraic and complex geometry]] || {{C|14}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 5. || [[:Category:Geometry]] || {{C|51}},{{C|52}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 6. || [[:Category:Topology]] || {{C|54}},{{C|55}},{{C|57}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 7. || [[:Category:Lie theory and generalizations]] || {{C|22}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 8. || [[:Category:Analysis]] || {{C|26}},{{C|28}},{{C|30}},{{C|31}},{{C|32}},{{C|33}},{{C|40}},{{C|41}},{{C|42}},{{C|43}},{{C|44}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 9. || [[:Category:Functional analysis and applications]] || {{C|46}},{{C|47}},{{C|48}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | 10. || [[:Category:Dynamical systems and ordinary differential equations]] || {{C|34}},{{C|37}} ({{C|39}})
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |11. || [[:Category:Partial differential equations]] || {{C|35}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |12. || [[:Category:Mathematical physics]] || {{C|70}},{{C|74}},{{C|76}},{{C|78}},{{C|80}},{{C|82}},{{C|83}},{{C|85}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |13. || [[:Category:Probability and statistics]] || {{C|60}},{{C|62}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |14. || [[:Category:Combinatorics]] || {{C|05}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |15. || [[:Category:Mathematical aspects of computer science]] || {{C|68}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |16. || [[:Category:Numerical analysis and scientific computing]] || {{C|65}},{{C|68}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |17. || [[:Category:Control theory and optimization]] || {{C|49}},{{C|93}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |18. || [[:Category:Mathematics in science and technology]] || {{C|81}},{{C|86}},{{C|90}},{{C|91}},{{C|92}},{{C|94}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |19. || [[:Category:Mathematics education and popularization of mathematics]] || {{C|00}},{{C|97}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |20. || [[:Category:History of mathematics]] || {{C|01}}
| |
| − | |}
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::[[User:Rehmann/sandbox/MSC_test | List of preliminary MR, Zbl, and MSC templates.]] --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 23:30, 12 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::This is obsolete, pleass see [[Talk:EoM:This_project#New_MSC_.26_categorization_templates| below]]. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 00:16, 27 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::The tableau (or some variants) has been used by IMU for the recent ICM section setup, see [http://www.icm2010.in/scientific-program/imu-sections ICM 2010]. (Cf. also: [http://www.icm2010.in/scientific-program/programme-structure more verbal], [http://www.icm2006.org/scientificprogram/scientificsections/ ICM 2006], [http://elib.zib.de/ICM98/B/3/ ICM 1998] --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 13:21, 15 December 2011 (CET), modified: 19:33, 25 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::: A good idea; I shall do. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 15:54, 17 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::: I've made a template [[User:Boris Tsirelson/MSC|here]] and used it in [[Tamagawa number]]. It would be better to use the template "<nowiki>[ 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification {{{1}}}{{#if:{{{2|}}}|,({{{2}}})|}} ]</nowiki>", since the call <nowiki>{{MSC|11F70}}</nowiki> should not generate "11F70,()". ''Unfortunately, the "ParserFunctions" extension is still missing.''
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::: An "MSC" template is worth using, since (1) changing it one can change the appearance of all MSC at once, and (2) in 2020 :-) one can instruct the template to replace some codes with new ones. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 16:57, 18 December 2011 (CET)
| |
| − | ::: --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]]
| |
| − | ::I have set up some algebra (etc.) subcategories with some new template [[User:Rehmann/sandbox/MSCtop]]. (Eventually all the MSC templates should be combined as soon as we will have the ParserFunctions extensions or so.) --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 23:29, 7 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::We need an msc macro which automatically produces not only the entry+link for the primary/secondary number, but also inserts the respective [[Category:<blah>]] line entries to categorize the pages. But this requires (at least) the ParserFunctions extensions, maybe more.--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 00:35, 8 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::The existing MSC template does not work correctly for such cases as {{User:Rehmann/sandbox/MSC|60-01|}}. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 13:09, 12 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::Yes, I know. That cannot be resolved without "#if"-clause, so I drafted another template [[User:Rehmann/sandbox/MSC-X]] for this special purpose (middle entry an hyphen '-') (and nagged the sysadmins again for installing #if). --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 16:44, 12 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::Here is a list of all the (preliminary) [[User:Rehmann/sandbox/MSC_test | MR. ZBL, and MSC templates]]. --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 23:26, 12 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :ParserFunctions works! Wow! --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 09:43, 19 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::Yes, that's good. It also offers some [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:StringFunctions nice string handling functions]. For further new extensions, see [[Special:version| Special:version]].--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 11:07, 19 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | =====New MSC & categorization templates=====
| |
| − | Here are [[Help:MSC_Templates|new categorization templates]]. It
| |
| − | suffices to inlude an MSC entry in a page, then the template will automatically add
| |
| − | the respecitve categories to that file. Please use them from now and let me know any problems you might
| |
| − | encounter. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 23:41, 26 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Yes, I did it on [[Absorbing state]], and strangely, it got three categories "Markov chains", "Probability and statistics", "Probability theory and stochastic processes". Before it had only the "Markov chains" category (this being a subcategory of "Markov processes" and so on, according to MSC). Is it the intended behavior? --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 09:14, 27 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :: Yes: According to [[Talk:EoM:This_project#Categories|our table above]] the MSC 60Jxx requires an entry in "13. Category:Probability and statistics". The MSC yields two other categories 60-XX Category:Probability theory and stochastic processes and 60Jxx Category:Markov processes. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 11:17, 27 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::: Usually (I mean, in Wikipedia) members of a subcategory are not members of the category. See for example [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Stochastic_processes] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Martingale_theory]. Otherwise high-level categories will be terribly overpopulated. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 14:45, 27 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :::: That's right. However, right now there is no big danger of any overpopulated categories like that, and it is more cumbersome to click one's your way through all analysis or algebra related subcategories in order to find out what is there. If this changes, it is very easy to remove files of a big subcategory from some supercategory, since this requires only to remove one entry in [[Template:Category]]. This is the advantage of a list controlled categorization: Entries are generated "on the fly" every time a page is called.
| |
| − | ::::: OK, I see. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 19:10, 27 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::: Well, "[[Absorbing state]]" probably is now as it should be (please check).
| |
| − | ::::: And please look at "[[:Category:Distribution theory]]"; any remarks?
| |
| − | ::::: As a consequence, now "[[:Category:Probability and statistics]]" contains subcategories of different levels: both "[[:Category:Probability theory and stochastic processes]]" and "[[:Category:Limit theorems]]"; should it be so?
| |
| − | :::::: Maybe not. I had seen this last night as well for [[:Category:Number theory]] and a few others, my solution was to use MSCwiki for indicating their MSC, which is not a good idea, as this will cause confusion. I now have modified [[Template:Category]] so that it does >not< categorize if called from a category page, so those pages have to be categorized by an explicit entry. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 00:43, 28 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::: (But do not bother about "[[:Category:Probability]]", I'll delete it, but only after rerouting all links to it.) --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 21:16, 27 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::: I wonder whether such a concept could be introduced for references as well. Generating the pagewise lists over a global list (or several such, the entries being already pre-formated) would ease to control the pagewise reference lists. Certainly many related pages share quite some reference entries. After all, TeX has a similar system (bibtex). --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 15:54, 27 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::: Yes, I recall that such means are used on Citizendium in chemistry and biology articles, but not in math articles. I am not sure that the result is worthy of the effort. I also wonder, in which namespace the bibliographic entries will be. Mainspace? No, it is for articles only. Templates? No, it is editable by admins only. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 19:09, 27 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | The page "[[Entropy theory of a dynamical system]]" has MSC Primary: 37A35 Secondary: 60G10; and Categories: Probability and statistics, Probability theory and stochastic processes, Dynamical systems and ordinary differential equations, Dynamical systems and ergodic theory, Ergodic theory (in this order). Thus, categories generated from the secondary MSC come first. It would be better to have them last. Or maybe not at all? Maybe only primary MSC should generate categories? --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 10:24, 15 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | : I have changed [[Template:MSC]]. The category order for that article now is:
| |
| − | : Dynamical systems and ordinary differential equations, Dynamical systems and ergodic theory, Probability and statistics, Probability theory and stochastic processes, Ergodic theory. Is it this what you have in mind?
| |
| − | ::: Much better than before. Ideally, "Ergodic theory" should go before "Probability and statistics", but this can wait.
| |
| − | : I think it is useful to also use the secondary msc for categorization: The category list should know all articles which are related to it. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 14:41, 15 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :: So, you are an inclusionist in this aspect... In Math Reviews (and arXiv emails) secondary articles are listed, but after primary articles, and marked as secondary. Otherwise they would make primary articles less visible. (And our categories will be quite populated in the previsible future.) --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 15:36, 15 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::: There are a few possibilities to achieve this: One is to define, for each category, a "secondary" one with same title (amended by "sec" or so), and being a member of the first ("primary") one, and to list the secondary classified articles there. This could be done by a staightforward extension of the msc template. Concerning your request on "Ergodic theory", you either suggest where to put that Category in [[Talk:EoM:This_project#Categories|our table above]], or another augmentation of the msc template might allow to input a further category explicitly. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 17:35, 15 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::: About secondary categories: yes, I like this idea.
| |
| − | :::: About the place of "Ergodic theory": this is just one of the third-lever categories (MSC|37Axx), if we call the 20 categories of the table (the ICM categories) the first level, the second level being for example MSC|37, and the third level for example MSC|37Axx. In most cases I like to use three levels. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 18:05, 15 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::: Yes, I see what you mean. The first should be easy, the second would require some thought. The [[Template:Category]] is table driven, and an appropriate table to include what you call 3rd level categories has to be set up. I'd prefer to postpone this a bit right now. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 21:14, 15 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::: Some proposal: It might make sense to prepend the MSC to the names of MSC related categories, so that the name of <nowiki>[[Category:Ergodic theory]]</nowiki> would be "37Axx Ergodic theory". For the categories from our table that could be achieved easily, categorisation would be done automatically via the templates. At the end, a few of the old categories would have to be deleted. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 00:37, 16 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::::: Could be useful (but I do not have a definitive opinion). In general, MSC is only useful for research level topics. But what to do with "basic" notions? Putting, e.g., [[injection]] in 03Exx or 26-XX is not really what is needed. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 01:34, 16 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::::: Yes, I also noted that MSC is only useful for research level topics, and I am often forced to use MSC|60-01, as in "[[Bernoulli trials]]". --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 07:01, 16 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::::: About "37Axx Ergodic theory": I am afraid, it is too insistent. If the reader wants to know the MSC of [[:Category:Ergodic theory]] he/she can see it on the category page. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 14:24, 16 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::::: Why not do it the other way? Take the MSC number as names for the categories, give the full classification on these category pages (avoiding external links), use plain language for non-MSC-induced categories, and use the MSC macro to display the full description. Wouldn't it be enough to put the classification at the end of the article? --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 01:57, 18 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | =====Technical Categories=====
| |
| − | | |
| − | How about a few "technical categories"? I think of "Category:TeX
| |
| − | encoded" and "Category:TeX encoding wanted".
| |
| − | | |
| − | People interested in editing certain pages but technically less skilled could
| |
| − | just enter an entry <nowiki>[[Category:TeX encoding wanted]]</nowiki>
| |
| − | and advertise these in order to get it converted by some $\rm \TeX$ freak. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 11:52, 27 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :No objections. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 14:48, 27 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | Here is this tex thing: [[Template:TEX]]. The state of the categories needs to to be updated.
| |
| − | * [[:Category:TeX done]]
| |
| − | * [[:Category:TeX partially done]]
| |
| − | * [[:Category:TeX wanted]]
| |
| − | | |
| − | One could think of more categories which reflect the state of pages, concerning their actualization state or the state of their references.
| |
| − | --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 17:42, 29 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | =====The tableau again=====
| |
| − | But why is 37 in "[[:Category:Partial differential equations]]"? It should be only in [[:Category:Dynamical systems and ordinary differential equations]]. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 16:55, 28 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :Probably because of mutual references between 35, 37, Hamiltonian and these KDF and NLS stuffs. But maybe you are right: if some article belongs into both that should be decided for that article individually. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 19:28, 28 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::Yes; now "[[Approximation by periodic transformations]]" does not belong to "Category:Partial differential equations", which was rather unexpected (at least to me). --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 20:17, 28 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===== What categories? =====
| |
| − | What categories should be created in addition to those generated by the MSC template?
| |
| − | For example: Should there be separate categories for Packings, Tilings, or only a common category, or not even that?
| |
| − | --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 02:41, 9 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :"Packing" is 52C15, 52C17; "tiling" is 52C20, 52C22; thus I'd put both into category 52C "Discrete geometry". --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 08:09, 9 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :: Yes, of course, This is the second level MSC classification (and could be deduced/inserted automatically from the classification number). But this is still a rather broad subject. Should there be some finer categorization, not "isomorphic" to the MSC numbers? --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 11:16, 9 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::: I propose to discuss this after the existing categories are really a bit more crowded, so that we have a basis of articles on which we can decide what is needed. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 19:23, 9 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===References===
| |
| | | | |
| − | Now, having ParserFunctions, we can choose a style for refs (and support it by templates).
| + | == Problems with auto-encoding == |
| | | | |
| − | For now refs are coded like that:
| + | The automatic encoding process seems to badly garble pages with cases: where one would expect a left lbrace without matching right rbrace. Examples are [[Weibull distribution]] and [[Walsh system]] where there is corrupt TeX and text has gone missing. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 16:14, 6 June 2020 (UTC) |
| | + | : Yes, that's right: The markup sources the encoding is based upon are partially scrambled (exactly what you are saying, missing 'silent' right braces). However, this is a systematic error and will be fixed soon. As an example, I have just fixed the pages you mention above, but there are quite a few more, will come back to this soon. |
| | + | : Thanks for mentioning this, Richard. Let me know it you find more such systematic errors - I often can find+fix them easily by my bots. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] ([[User talk:Ulf Rehmann|talk]]) 17:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | <pre>
| + | The automatic encoding seems to miss out Tex in references. There are a lot of references to $K$-theory and $p$-adic numbers, for example. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 16:22, 6 June 2020 (UTC) |
| − | <table><TR><TD valign="top">[1]</TD> <TD valign="top">
| + | : Yes, right as well: The markup sources generally do miss the $\TeX$ encoding for the references (I don't know why). This either has to be replaced by hand (or possibly by my old bot to enrich the references by MR/ZBL links, which would get the titles as encoded by MR and thereby replacing the png images by mathjax encoding - but I should find the time to adjust these bots to the new software situation). --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] ([[User talk:Ulf Rehmann|talk]]) 17:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC) |
| − | H. Cartan, S. Eilenberg, "Homological algebra" , Princeton Univ. Press (1956)
| |
| − | </TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[2]</TD> <TD valign="top">
| |
| − | A. Grothendieck, "Sur quelques points d'algèbre homologique" ''Tohoku Math. J.'' , '''9''' (1957) pp. 119–221
| |
| − | </TD></TR></table>
| |
| − | </pre>
| |
| | | | |
| − | and rendered like that: | + | There's also a problem with braces around sub- and superscripts. I have seen examples, such as [[Space over an algebra]], of $x^{-1}$ being rendered as $x^{-}1$, $\sum_{j=1}$ as $\sum_{j=}1$ and so on. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 16:59, 7 June 2020 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | <table><TR><TD valign="top">[1]</TD> <TD valign="top"> H. Cartan, S. Eilenberg, "Homological algebra" , Princeton Univ. Press (1956)</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[2]</TD> <TD valign="top"> A. Grothendieck, "Sur quelques points d'algèbre homologique" ''Tohoku Math. J.'' , '''9''' (1957) pp. 119–221</TD></TR></table>
| + | There's a stray word '''size''' in the commutative diagrams at [[Diagram]], [[Spectral homology]], [[Triple]]. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 18:36, 7 June 2020 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | At least, we can create template(s) that save us the trouble of writing all these
| + | A stray '''down 2''' in the subscripts at [[Modular curve]]. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 18:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC) |
| − | "<table><TR><TD..."
| |
| | | | |
| − | The best is probably the $\LaTeX$-like automatic numbering; but I doubt we can do it. If we cannot, then articles are not easily editable (not quite "wiki-wiki"), since a new source inserted in the middle of the list requires manual change of many numbers (both in the refs list and, worse, throughout the article). I did it several times working on "[[Measurable space]]"; not nice. No wonder that linking by numbers is not used on Wikipedia. On the other hand, our articles tend to be much less volatile than these of Wikipedia. Any comment?
| + | Translation of SL for special linear group should be mathrm not mathop, as the latter produces curious results for $SL_2$ in display mode. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 18:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 12:38, 19 January 2012 (CET)
| + | It seems that when a text phrase in parentheses follows a formula, the space is in the wrong place, that is after the opening parenthesis rather than before, such as the third line of [[Stability of characteristic exponents]]. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 12:53, 20 June 2020 (UTC) |
| − | :The [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Tables mediawiki equvalent of the table] above is
| |
| − | <pre>
| |
| − | {|
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |valign="top"|[1]||valign="top"| H. Cartan, S. Eilenberg, "Homological algebra" , Princeton Univ. Press (1956)
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |valign="top"|[2]||valign="top"| A. Grothendieck, "Sur quelques points d'algèbre homologique" ''Tohoku Math. J.'' , '''9''' (1957) pp. 119-221
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |}
| |
| − | </pre>
| |
| − | :which looks much easier and renders like this:
| |
| − | {|
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |valign="top"|[1]||valign="top"| H. Cartan, S. Eilenberg, "Homological algebra" , Princeton Univ. Press (1956)
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |valign="top"|[2]||valign="top"| A. Grothendieck, "Sur quelques points d'algèbre homologique" ''Tohoku Math. J.'' , '''9''' (1957) pp. 119-221
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |}
| |
| | | | |
| − | :In fact, the strings |valign="top" probably can be omitted:
| + | The ellipsis $,\ldots,$ is often rendered as $\ldots$, that is, without the commas. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 16:37, 23 June 2020 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | {|
| + | There are a few articles with a mysterious word ''riangle'' in formulae which don't seem to render properly. I think it's some form of triangle. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 14:22, 31 December 2020 (UTC) |
| − | |- | + | : I've dealt with all of these, I think. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 11:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC) |
| − | |[1]|| H. Cartan, S. Eilenberg, "Homological algebra" , Princeton Univ. Press (1956)
| |
| − | |- | |
| − | |valign="top"|[2]||valign="top"| A. Grothendieck, "Sur quelques points d'algèbre homologique" ''Tohoku Math. J.'' , '''9''' (1957) pp. 119-221 | |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |}
| |
| | | | |
| − | :However, this concept conflicts with our earlier convention to use '|' as a separator between MR and Zbl numbers. Maybe that should be modified.
| + | In [[Kripke models]] there's an unrecognised symbol $\hul$ which appears to be something to do with a version of $\leftrightharpoons$. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 14:23, 31 December 2020 (UTC) |
| − | :--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 20:55, 19 January 2012 (CET) | |
| | | | |
| − | :: If you want automatic numbering, why not simply:
| + | The encoding ''bold cdot'' occurs in several articles: I suspect $\bullet$ is intended. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 18:42, 2 January 2021 (UTC) |
| − | # H. Cartan, S. Eilenberg, "Homolthogical algebra" , Princeton Univ. Press (1956)
| |
| − | # A. Grothendieck, "Sur quelques points d'algèbre homologique" ''Tohoku Math. J.'' , '''9''' (1957) pp. 119-221
| |
| − | :: But why numbering at all? As has been said above: If there are references by number then automatic numbering (or manual renumbering) requires changing of the references, too, and if there are no references numbers are not used. In the text, references like (Cartan-Eilenberg, 1956) are more friendly to the reader. Personally, I prefer bibliographies in chronological order, possibly split in recommended reading, references, and historical sources. | |
| − | :: --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 23:35, 19 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::One may want numbered or labeled references, since this allows precise referencing, like "Thm. 1: <blah>. For proof cf. [42, p. 456f]" or the like. --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 00:35, 20 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::: "Thm. 1: <blah>. For proof cf. [Cartan-Eilenberg, p. 456f]" is only slightly longer, carries the same information, and may often be understood without looking on the references. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 02:37, 20 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::::: One needs a reference list anyway, since most citations are from journals (and you don't want to quote the stuff say from ref 2 above inline). This could be achieved by using <ref "name"> ... </ref> tags and the [http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Reflist <nowiki>{{reflist}}</nowiki>] template, but then the ''automatically created'' list won't be sorted. So your proposal could be achieved if one uses just alphanumeric tags for each ref (as is often done in math literature) and sort the list by hand (unless a template is found to sort some list??) -- no renumbering needed in case of new refs.--[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 13:08, 20 January 2012 (CET) | |
| | | | |
| − | (unindent)<br>
| + | Mysterious ''Young'' and ''spd'' at [[Young diagram]]. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 21:47, 4 January 2021 (UTC) |
| − | By a (not very extensive) search I found [http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~gearyfamily/expression-web/sort-table.html]and [http://www.the-art-of-web.com/javascript/oopsort/].
| |
| − | --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 18:56, 20 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :Thanks. How would one make these programs work within a wikimedia template? --[[User:Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 19:36, 20 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ====Reference tables easily made sortable====
| + | There are also stray occurrences of ''tilde'' in some places. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 18:22, 11 January 2021 (UTC) |
| − | This way they are easily extendable.
| |
| − | (Please click on [sort] below. For details [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Sorting see here]])
| |
| | | | |
| − | {| class="sortable"
| + | An issue with stray occurrences of words like this is that it's hard to search for them. I can't find a way of searching for the word "tilde", say, that does not also return occurrences of the latex command with the preceding backslash. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 11:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC) |
| − | |-
| |
| − | ! scope="col" | [sort]
| |
| − | ! scope="col" class="unsortable" |
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |valign="top"|[Jac1]||valign="top"| C.G.J. Jacobi, "Considerationes generales de transcendentibus abelianis" ''J. Reine Angew. Math.'', '''9''' (1832) pp. 349–403 {{ZBL|009.0357cj}} {{ZBL|14.0314.01}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |valign="top"|[Jac2]||valign="top"| C.G.J. Jacobi, "De functionibus duarum variabilium quadrupliciter periodicis, quibus theoria transcendentium abelianarum innititur" ''J. Reine Angew. Math.'', '''13''' (1835) pp. 55–78 {{ZBL|013.0473cj}} {{ZBL|26.0506.01}} {{ZBL|14.0314.01}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |valign="top"|[AM]||valign="top"| A. Andreotti, A. Mayer, "On period relations for abelian integrals on algebraic curves" ''Ann. Scu. Norm. Sup. Pisa'', '''21''' (1967) pp. 189–238 {{MR|0220740}} {{ZBL|0222.14024}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |valign="top"|[Griff2]||valign="top"| P.A. Griffiths, "An introduction to the theory of special divisors on algebraic curves", Amer. Math. Soc. (1980) {{MR|0572270}} {{ZBL|0446.14010}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |valign="top"|[Mum]||valign="top"| D. Mumford, "Curves and their Jacobians", Univ. Michigan Press (1978) {{MR|0419430 }}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |valign="top"|[Griff1]||valign="top"| P.A. Griffiths, J.E. Harris, "Principles of algebraic geometry", Wiley (Interscience) (1978) {{MR|0507725}} {{ZBL|0408.14001}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |valign="top"|[Se]||valign="top"| J-P. Serre, "Groupes algébrique et corps des classes", Hermann (1959) {{MR|0103191 }}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |}
| |
| | | | |
| − | ------------------------------ | + | === Semi-automatic encoding === |
| | + | Please also let me know about any potential problems that occur for [[User:Maximilian_Janisch/latexlist/texified|articles]] that are texified with the "semi-automatic" method. --[[User:Maximilian Janisch|Maximilian Janisch]] ([[User talk:Maximilian Janisch|talk]]) 16:48, 1 July 2020 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | :Nice, but it does not solve the problem, which style to use: "[1]" or "[Jac1]". --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 07:50, 11 February 2012 (CET) | + | :In the article [[Stochastic process, generalized]], the automatic texification made a few mistakes relating to parenthesized expressions in exponents: $ X ^ {(}n) $ vs. $ X ^ {(n)} $. [[User:AxelBoldt|AxelBoldt]] ([[User talk:AxelBoldt|talk]]) 22:03, 7 November 2021 (UTC) |
| − | :: One has to use an alphabetic descriptor, if one does not want to rearrange the entries for every newly added item. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 10:53, 11 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::: OK, but probably we should have one way recommended to all. On Wikipedia, the style of refs is left to each author; should we? --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 12:19, 11 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::: I think we should leave this to the authors. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 22:01, 13 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| | | | |
| − | Here are two templates [[Template:Ref]], [[Template:Cite]] which allow to define reference points <nowiki>{{Ref|Se}} which can be addressed by {{Cite|Re}}</nowiki>. An implementation with several sortable reference lists is given on the page [[Jacobi variety|Jacobi variety]]. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 22:01, 13 February 2012 (CET)
| + | :: This appears to be an issue with the automatic (not the semi-automatic) encoding, and I‘m afraid that it may have happened in other articles too 😅. —[[User:Maximilian Janisch|Maximilian Janisch]] ([[User talk:Maximilian Janisch|talk]]) 22:22, 7 November 2021 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | : A progress! | + | :::Yes, this is another aspect of my comment dated 16:59, 7 June 2020 a few lines above. It is unfortunately rather common. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 07:07, 8 November 2021 (UTC) |
| − | : It would be still nicer, to have more (optional) parameters that allow (a) to make "See [M, Sect. 5]" rather than "See [M], Sect. 5" (on WP it is the "loc=" parameter), and (b) to put an anchor whose name is not the same as its visible text (like in <nowiki>[[aaa|bbb]]</nowiki>). --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 22:38, 13 February 2012 (CET) | |
| − | : Yes, it works nicely. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 20:58, 14 February 2012 (CET) | |
| − | :: The "Cite" template could generate "[H, p. 222]" rather than "[H,p. 222]" if called as "<nowiki>{{Cite|H|p. 222}}</nowiki>. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 16:15, 16 March 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::: Should be fixed, please check.--[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 16:44, 16 March 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :::: Yes it works, thank you. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 19:39, 16 March 2012 (CET)
| |
| | | | |
| − | [[Help:Normalize_EoM_references | Here is some comfortable toy]] to get the old reference tables transcribed into wikipedia tables, thereby ordering them and installing the appropriate links and anchors using [[Template:Ref]] and [[Template:Cite]] throughout the page. | + | Just found this page, and this section seems to cover most of the problems that I've been correcting manually, see [[User talk:Maximilian Janisch|Maximilian's talk]]. Thanks! [[User:Liuyao|Liuyao]] ([[User talk:Liuyao|talk]]) 17:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | The best way to use that script is via an external editor, which allows to
| + | == Favicon == |
| − | employ the script as a "filter" for the editor's buffer content.
| |
| | | | |
| − | It would be nice if the script were exercised by others as well to get some feedback about it's operation. Detection of authors' names depends on some heuristic (see the script's annotations), which so far worked pretty well.
| + | This is a "beautification" section. |
| | | | |
| − | See my recent output on [[Special:RecentChanges]] with summary "refs" etc to get an idea how the ref tables will look like. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 14:32, 18 February 2012 (CET) | + | Has there ever been a discussion on the possibility of using a favicon for the website EoM? I believe it would be beneficial to the cementation of the website, as well improve its general appearance. --[[User:Redactedentity|Mihir Narayanan]] ([[User talk:Redactedentity|talk]]) 00:23, 10 December 2020 (UTC) |
| | + | :Yes, but to no avail yet: See [[Talk:EoM:This_project#A_completely_trivial_suggestion:_Should_we_provide_a_favicon_.28logo.29.3F_Any_proposals.3F|this]]. - [[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] ([[User talk:Ulf Rehmann|talk]]) 05:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC) |
| | + | ::I think I could make a favicon .ico file using an illusrtration software, with a design representing the phrase "E of M". Would you like me to do so? --[[User:Redactedentity|Mihir Narayanan]] ([[User talk:Redactedentity|talk]]) 00:23, 10 December 2020 (UTC) |
| | + | ::: I have added this to my list of [https://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=User:Maximilian_Janisch/issues&diff=51730&oldid=51685 things to do]. --[[User:Maximilian Janisch|Maximilian Janisch]] ([[User talk:Maximilian Janisch|talk]]) 09:15, 25 June 2021 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | Now unicode letters are appropriately handled as well, see the reference list on [[Abstract algebraic logic#References]]. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 14:23, 20 February 2012 (CET)
| + | == Mathematical X vs X, mathematical == |
| | | | |
| − | ====Globally defined reference lists====
| + | We have articles [[Mathematical ecology]], [[Mathematical economics]], [[Mathematical linguistics]], [[Mathematical morphology]], [[Mathematical physics]], [[Mathematical programming]], [[Mathematical statistics]] on the one hand, and [[Abstraction, mathematical]], [[Crystallography, mathematical]], [[Model, mathematical]] on the other. I would suggest a common style of "Mathematical X", which is the majority, moving the minority. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 17:48, 16 January 2021 (UTC) |
| − | It occurred to me that many pages related to the same area might share some common (larger) reference list which may also be annotated guide for further reading. It would spare us repeating the same Refs/Cites ad nauseam. One might argue that this would lead to extra browsing, but in fact the current practice in any case tends to mimic that of mathematical papers with all references at the end, rather than "humanitarian" papers with references in the footnotes. I see no large difference between pointing to the bottom of the same (lengthy) page and pointing to a well designed list on a separate page.
| |
| | | | |
| − | Can we implement such style by templates? should we encourage it? [[User:Yakovenko|Sergei Yakovenko]] 10:46, 23 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | A similar comment applies to [[Algebra, fundamental theorem of]] versus [[Fundamental theorem of calculus]]. The latter incidentally rather oddly redirects to [[Newton-Leibniz formula]] where the Fundamental Theorem is mentioned in a rather odd way. I would suggest a move of the former to [[Fundamental theorem of algebra]]. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 19:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | : I think it is worth keeping a small number of references (those directly relevant) on each article, especially the papers relating to results mentioned. I think it would very useful to also having a larger subject reference list with annotations, however. Many references in the articles are not directly relevant, but supply 'background reading', which would be better served by more global lists. [[User:TBloom|TBloom]] 12:53, 23 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | == Way forward? == |
| | | | |
| − | == Username: acceptable and unacceptable ==
| + | What are the next steps for the project? [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 16:24, 6 September 2021 (UTC) |
| | + | : Hi Richard, I will note that there is a small list of things that might be worth a look at [[User:Maximilian_Janisch/issues|here]]. On another note, I was busy this year with writing my master's thesis (I will presumably obtain my master's at the end of this September), so I haven't kept track of the EoM much. I hope that I'll be able to be more active again in the future, Maximilian --[[User:Maximilian Janisch|Maximilian Janisch]] ([[User talk:Maximilian Janisch|talk]]) 15:20, 7 September 2021 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | Is it written somewhere, which usernames are acceptable here?
| + | While acknowledging the sterling work of the few people who have been contributing over the past couple of years, I wonder whether it is time to agree that the project has come to a natural conclusion? To revive it means building up a community with a number of contributors, and, just as importantly, setting a direction for the many topics that are under- or even un-represented. If there's any interest for getting that editorial work done, possibly via some sort of meeting or workshop, I would be willing to help promote it. I believe funds might be available. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 13:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC) |
| − | :No, its not (yet), finger glitch, corrected.--[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 11:51, 26 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | As far as I see, "TrialAndError" is rejected, while "AgelessMale", "Abrar.p496" etc. are accepted. On Wikipedia, almost every name is acceptable. On Citizendium, only real names are (thus, "Rafael.greenblatt" would be "
| |
| − | "Rafael Greenblatt" on CZ). We should publish a rule before punishing for its violation. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 10:57, 26 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :Sure.--[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 11:51, 26 January 2012 (CET)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Time zones ==
| + | : I see that a lot of old posting have been archived. There are some questions of mine in that tranche that are still formally active, in the sense that they have never been answered, but they required either direction from members of the editorial board or a vigorous debate among the working editors, and I'm sorry to say that neither of those ever happened. That's one of the reasons why I'm rather pessimistic about the future of this project. I first raised this question a couple of years ago, and there has been no real answer. |
| | | | |
| − | I just noticed that the history pages display UTC/GMT, while the time stamps produced by signatures are CET.
| + | : It seems to me there are three possible routes. |
| − | In order to avoid confusion, they should give UTC, too. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 01:18, 28 January 2012 (CET)
| + | :: 1. Acknowledge that the project represents a view of mathematics at a certain set of points in time, and close it off with a minimal amount of tidying up. |
| | + | :: 2. Acknowledge that Wikipedia has, for better or worse, occupied the space the project might have occupied, and seek to merge it into Wikipedia. This would require a medium amount of effort, but there are many volunteers there. |
| | + | :: 3. Try to bring the project up to date. This would require a lot of effort, and that has to be either paid for or someone has to think of a reason why volunteers would take part (rather than on Wikipedia, say). Indeed, simply scoping out the gaps that have opened up in the past decades and drawing up a list of necessary new articles would in itself be a major project requiring effort from a group of people at a quite high level: one thinks of a conference or workshp convened by the editorial board members and others, for example. That's before anyone tries to find the resources for writing those missing articles. Perhaps the EMS might take it on as a major project. It's very far beyond what can be crowd-sourced by a handful of volunteers, however well-meaning and active. |
| | | | |
| − | : Also, "Recent changes" is cheating about the order of changes. For example: my edit of 30 March 2012, 11:38 (according to "Recent changes") is in fact made after Ulf Rehmann's edit of 30 March 2012, 18:45 (according to "Recent changes"). --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 13:44, 30 March 2012 (CEST) | + | : But someone has to decide to take action, make a case and coordinate effort. Without that initiative, the project is by default choosing option (1), to close itself down more or less gracefully. |
| | + | [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 16:32, 15 October 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | :: Apparently something is wrong with the clock on this server. As you still can see, on "recent changes" two of my changes on "Schubert cylces" got a timestamp which is still in the future, though I edited these this morning.
| + | == Get rid of Springer logo ? == |
| − | :: Also, some links point to historical versions of pages, not to the most recent. I did already this morning email the sys admins about that, but as they are in the US they aren't yet awake, as it seems. Well, we'll see... --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 15:11, 30 March 2012 (CEST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Something is wrong ==
| + | Maybe one should now get rid of the prominent Springer logo, but keep only some sentence somewhere about the history ? |
| | | | |
| − | I try to edit [[Convergence of measures]] as usual (just adding MSC and category); but as a result the page becomes empty. (Twice.) --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 16:26, 7 February 2012 (CET)
| + | And also we should get rid of the cookies. Who needs cookies here ? |
| − | : I cannot confirm this: I edited the page twice, the first time under my admin account, and by adding MSC, the second time under my account TestUser with just ordinary user permission, and by adding the tex category "TeX wanted". Everything worked fine, as it seems. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 19:00, 7 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | :: Rather mysterious. I got it again, this time on [[Cramér theorem]]. I added
| |
| | | | |
| − | ::<nowiki> | + | [[User:Chapoton|Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 20:26, 15 March 2023 (UTC) |
| − | {{MSC|60F10}}
| |
| − | </nowiki>
| |
| | | | |
| − | ::<nowiki> | + | :Cookies warnings are still there, despite some claims to the contrary. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 09:50, 12 October 2023 (UTC) |
| − | [[Category:Limit theorems]] | |
| − | </nowiki>
| |
| | | | |
| − | ::did "Show preview" (nothing strange here) and then "Save", and got the empty page! --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 20:08, 7 February 2012 (CET)
| + | == MSC template link is broken ✅ == |
| | | | |
| − | :: More observations. This time I was not asked to answer an arithmetic question; but the previous time I was, with the explanation "since you are adding an external link". More: I use exactly the same browser and system as all the time before. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 20:12, 7 February 2012 (CET)
| + | The first link in the MSC template is currently broken. See for example on top of [[Arithmetic number]]. It should probably be removed, keeping only the MathSciNet and ZentralBlatt links. |
| | | | |
| − | :: And now, on [[User:Boris Tsirelson/sandbox1]] I got again "Your edit includes new external links" but nevertheless the page did not get blank. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 20:17, 7 February 2012 (CET) | + | I would like to add an OEIS template linking to https://oeis.org/ (done ✅) |
| | | | |
| − | ::And now it went smoothly on [[Cramér theorem]] with the same procedure as I did before.
| + | [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 09:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC) |
| − | ::But I also note that the behavior of the edit window changes (another reaction to right-click). --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 20:27, 7 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ::: I had no problem with adding a template (with question). A subsequent edit worked without question. (Yesterday I had to answer a question everytime I saved -- I don't remember if external links were mentioned (I probably did not read the text), but I certainly did not add external links (at most wiki links). My impression was: Having to confirm every edit is too much ... --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 21:36, 7 February 2012 (CET) | + | :And for course, it should be MSC2020, not MSC2010. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 08:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC) ✅ |
| | | | |
| − | :::: MSC template generates external links. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 22:21, 7 February 2012 (CET) | + | ::And the MSN and ZBL templates themselves are sometimes called with several codes, which leads nowhere. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 13:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | ::::: Yes, I have noticed this. But yesterday I did not use a template. | + | :::And the broken MSC link now points to a borked website, with spam. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 16:51, 13 August 2023 (UTC) |
| − | ::::: As for the external links: I'm not sure that this is useful, in particular to MathSciNet: This will either not work (without access rights), or produce a much too long list of results. And why link to the MSCwiki? A copy of the classification can easily be hosted here at EoM (and be integrated with the content). --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 22:55, 7 February 2012 (CET) | |
| | | | |
| − | I have notified the admins at Springer about this. It may be that they are still trying experimental software. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 22:59, 7 February 2012 (CET)
| + | : The MSN templates have been fixed now. Please report any issues. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 09:51, 12 October 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | : It seems, now I understand it better. When I hit "Edit" I get the edit window with the wikitext; first it is in one font, but after about a second it switches to another font. Later, being asked "To help protect against automated spam, please solve the simple sum below and enter the answer in the box", I see the wikitext again in the former (larger) font, and this time the switch to the "right" (smaller) front takes several seconds. IF I solve the sum more quickly :-) not waiting for the font switch THEN I get the infamous empty page effect. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 13:00, 13 February 2012 (CET)
| + | == "How to cite" link should use https == |
| | | | |
| − | :: I cannot confirm this either. I do see the switch of fonts, but I never see an empty page nor do I get an offer to answer an arithmetic question after login. To me, your problem description seems to indicate a timing problem concerning your network connection with the server. Anyway, such things should not happen, and I will notify the admins again. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 17:08, 13 February 2012 (CET)
| + | At the bottom of every page, it still uses "http". |
| | | | |
| − | ::: About arithmetic question after login: this time I get it only when I insert an external link (which happens via MSC template). About my network connection with the server: yes, sometimes it is bad. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 18:24, 13 February 2012 (CET) | + | [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 09:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | == Another useful template: "anchor" ==
| + | I have no idea where this is configured. This does not seem to be a template. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 09:48, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | The template [[User:Boris Tsirelson/Anchor]] is used in "[[Measurable space]]". An example: the code <nowiki>"[[Measurable space#subspace|subspace]]"</nowiki> generated a link to an "anchor" (entry point): [[Measurable space#subspace|subspace]] (try it); the anchor is set by the code <nowiki>"{{User:Boris Tsirelson/Anchor|subspace}}"</nowiki> in that article.
| + | :For a random example, see [[Jet]]. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 10:19, 12 October 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | If you like this template, move it to the template namespace for wide use. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 17:12, 9 February 2012 (CET)
| + | == Zbl is now free ✅ == |
| − | :Sure, that could be helpful. It should be equipped with some documentation.
| |
| − | :How about this one [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Anchor this one]? But I don't know whether a multiple named anchor is needed. An <nowiki>#if:{{{1|}}}</nowiki> clause may be useful, homever.--[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 18:56, 9 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::For me, any working version will be good enough. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 20:20, 9 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::: Done: [[Template:Anchor]] --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 21:28, 14 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | ::Yes, it works nicely. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 20:59, 14 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Originator ==
| + | So we should change the little padlock icon besides the ZBL link in the ZBL template. |
| | | | |
| − | I noticed the following: Imported pages (first revision) show an "originator" on "How to cite this entry".
| + | [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 10:03, 16 March 2023 (UTC) |
| − | This information disappears after the first edit -- is it completely lost or is it only hidden somewhere?
| |
| − | (The first revision does no longer show it.) --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 01:25, 16 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| − | : I don't know, will ask. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 13:16, 16 February 2012 (CET)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Typography ==
| + | :Unless the padlock icon means an exterior link ? [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 14:30, 17 March 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | Perhaps it is only my browser, but for my feeling the font used for inline TeX is slightly too large. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 00:42, 7 March 2012 (CET)
| + | I see that the padlock is for https links, so nothing to change after all. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 07:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | :Here is how I see it.
| + | == The DOI template should use https ✅ == |
| − | [[File:Screenshot1.png]]
| |
| − | :--[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 08:01, 7 March 2012 (CET)
| |
| | | | |
| − | :: The screenshot shows it, too. The letters have not the same pointsize. For me, the following example shows the difference quite clearly: A'''A'''$A$A$\cal A$A$\mathbb A$A. --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 12:11, 7 March 2012 (CET)
| + | Because this is now the standard way to go. |
| | | | |
| − | == EoM and WP ==
| + | [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 08:13, 17 March 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | Hi. Could you please compare and contrast the EoM and the Wikipedia. For example, what would be the pros and cons for authors in deciding where to contribute. Thank you. [[User:Fgnievinski|Fgnievinski]] 21:52, 13 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | : Done, fixed. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 09:46, 12 October 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | :Well, on one hand, on WP your article will be much more visited. On the other hand, most probably it will become somewhat incorrect, mostly because people will make local changes not worrying about inconsistencies thus created. Sometimes they will do quite stupid changes; sometimes they will insist in spite of your protest. And another problem: on WP, an editor (be it really an expert, or not at all) is not permitted to write something just because it is true; rather, you must give a reference (preferably, to a textbook); otherwise, your text has a chance to persist, and a chance to be removed. Also, someone can find an erroneous statement in a bad book, include it to your article, and insist. And, after all, WP is not intended to professional mathematicians; there, your article can be attacked as "giving not enough context", which means: too hard and special for a general reader. (Again, there is a chance to persist, and a chance to be deleted.) --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 08:52, 14 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | == Get rid of empty comment sections == |
| − | ::Despite the obvious drawbacks, very often the WP math pages are quite reasonable as a zero approximation (with some technical, style or reference corrections). We (the editors) should probably encourage people to borrow heavily from (good) WP articles, adding the missing things. [[User:Yakovenko|Sergei Yakovenko]] 11:53, 17 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | ::: However, our material should be strictly based on references to original refereed literature. We should not quote WP for facts. Remember that EoM has been and should be considered as a refereed source, even by WP, see [//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Encyclopedia_of_Mathematics this]. Otherwise we would not need an editorial board. We should be aware of our [[Encyclopedia_of_Mathematics:Policy | publishing policy]]. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 12:52, 17 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | :::: In principle, WP is even more strictly based on references. For example, here I sometimes spot errors in books (like [[Standard probability space#Criticism|this]]). On WP I could not do it, unless the criticism is already published in a "reliable source", since on WP I am just a user (called "editor"), not an expert; I may add to the sources no more that "results of simple calculations". Here, hopefully, I am an expert, entitled to go beyond the simple calculations. But it is also true that in practice WP contains many non-sourced statements; some of these are wrong; but worse, some of the sourced statements are also wrong (maybe even in the same proportion), for the reasons I already mentioned above in this section. Let me also mention that the WP rules discourage references to encyclopedias ("tertial sources") as well as research papers ("primary sources") and encourage references to textbooks and monographs ("secondary sources").--[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 13:29, 17 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | ::::: So we are different: We do rely on and will quote what they call "primary".--[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 14:31, 17 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | :::::: Ulf, I am not sure the original research papers are the best source. I would rather believe that we need to point our readers to the best "verified"/"certified" ''complete'' exposition, which is almost always a monograph or a textbook. [[User:Yakovenko|Sergei Yakovenko]] 08:52, 19 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | ::::::: Agreed, insomuch this is available. But recent developments often don't have this. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 09:24, 19 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | :::: Thus, a statement from WP could be reproduced here (I think so) provided that it is reproduced by an expert responsible for its correctness (and refs). But another obstacle exists. If Google robots will observe here a content from WP, our Google rank will decrease dramatically. (This obstacle was taken very seriously on Citizendium.) Probably we could convince a human that our article is more reliable than the corresponding WP article even if they are textually identical. But, how to convince the Google robots? --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 13:29, 17 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | ::::: This is serious and a considerable argument against using content from WP. So, what we need is an authentic formulation of our texts.--[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 14:31, 17 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == MathJax suggestion ==
| + | How can one find the list of articles containing an empty comment section ? How to get rid of them in some automatic way ? |
| | | | |
| − | I find the MathJax default behaviour a little "untypographical" in that on initial page-load one sees a load of raw LaTeX. After some experimentation on my personal webpages I have found that that the following MathJax config | + | Where can I find documentation on the API for the encyclopedia ? |
| − | <pre>
| |
| − | <script type="text/x-mathjax-config">
| |
| − | MathJax.Hub.Config(
| |
| − | {
| |
| − | tex2jax:
| |
| − | {
| |
| − | inlineMath: [ ['$','$'], ["\\(","\\)"] ],
| |
| − | processEscapes: true,
| |
| − | preview: [["span", { style: { color: "Gold" } }, ["\u22EF"]]]
| |
| − | }
| |
| − | }
| |
| − | );
| |
| − | </script>
| |
| − | </pre>
| |
| − | gives a more attractive user experience. The "preview" configuration specifies that a gold-coloured centred ellipsis be used instead of the raw LaTeX. See for example [http://soliton.vm.bytemark.co.uk/pub/jjg/en/code/maxmod.html this page]. Perhaps something similar (obviously using a different colour, perhaps red) could be used for EoM?
| |
| | | | |
| − | --[[User:Jjg|Jjg]] 15:24, 16 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 13:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | : Thanks for this interesting suggestion. I don't have access to the EoM server installation, so I can't give it a try directly. However, I have servers running privately with a mathjax installation under mediawiki. I tried your code and it did not work the same way as on your page (in fact the server did not render tex images at all, it just did show the source code). The mathjax script on the EoM server (and on the one I run here) is more involved than the one on your site (look at the source code of any page, search for 'tex2jax'). --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 14:18, 14 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | == ISBN template == |
| | | | |
| − | == Typographic consistency ==
| + | We may like to have an IBSN template, as this appears in some references. But what should it link to ? |
| | | | |
| − | Hi
| + | [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 14:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | I wonder if there are any views on typographic consistency in EoM, and if there are any policy plans for it. I ask because there seems to be some typographical "drift" in the articles so far TeXed. As an example, the unTeXed page [[Local-global principles for large rings of algebraic integers]] uses the traditional bold-face $\mathbf{Z}$ for the integers, $\mathbf{C}$ for the complex field and so on, whereas the TeXed [[General linear group]] uses blackboard bold $\Z$ for the integers. Regardless of my personal opinions (that blackboard bold is an abomination that should only be seen on a blackboard!) I think that it is more important that typographic consistency be maintained.
| + | :We could link to wikipedia tool for ISBN, namely "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/". [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 09:05, 19 March 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | Could make some suggestions in this direction?
| + | ::The [[Template:ISBN|ISBN template]] doesn't currently exist, so using it means that the ISBN is no longer visible. At present, then, trying to use it is a step backwards. [[User:Richard Pinch|Richard Pinch]] ([[User talk:Richard Pinch|talk]]) 08:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC) |
| − | * That there is a policy page on typography for TeXers
| |
| − | * That the default policy be to maintain the typographic conventions of the original page
| |
| − | * That deviations from default policy are discussed and then clearly enumerated on the policy page
| |
| − | * That TeXers are encouraged to used "standard" mathjax macros (like <nowiki>\C</nowiki> for the complex numbers)
| |
| − | * That the standard mathjax macros reflect the policy (so <nowiki>\C</nowiki> should produce $\mathbf{C}$ until such a time as blackboard bold becomes policy)
| |
| − | * That redefining standard mathjax macros is treated as a fault in the page and corrected (perhaps by a script)
| |
| | | | |
| − | Thoughts?
| + | : Hopefully, it will exists very soon. I am waiting for somebody to come back from holidays and give me the rights to create templates. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 08:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | Jim (--[[User:Jjg|Jjg]] 15:21, 16 April 2012 (CEST))
| + | The ISBN template has now been filled in a minimal way, just displaying the data. If we like, we can make it a link to something. Any preference or opinion ? [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 09:43, 12 October 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | : Actually I am hesitating to be too rigid here at this time. This is a project joining very different mathematical communities which might have different typographical cultures. Also, the typography of the old files is not consistent either (may be for the same reason: many authors from many fields) - I have seen pages where \mathbf{C} did *not* mean "complex numbers". It is essential, however, that the typography is consistent in pages whose content is close, but I hope this will be regulated by the authors from the various areas. The macros predefined by mathjax are [[User:Ulf_Rehmann/Predefined_TeX_Macros | these]]. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 18:38, 16 April 2012 (CEST) | + | We could also link to the page https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-2-26-702700-6 . [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 19:46, 27 October 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | == Editing Policy ==
| + | :One should now proceed with au automated search-and-remplace to apply the ISBN template in all possible places. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 08:12, 4 November 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | I have "commissioned" 10 or so articles now to get things going in my area (where there is practically nothing on EoM for historical reasons). I guess these will start appearing in a few months. But many of the young wikipedia-generation mathoverflow-types I have approached have a similar complaint -- that the barrier-to-entry to making edits is too high, and the whole project appears too hierarchical.
| + | == Uploading images == |
| | | | |
| − | We surely really want all young mathematicians on this site, editing it. Initially we may have to select/invite these people, but once it gets going and is more comprehensive and useful, we want anyone to edit, not just the people that we think of. So we want a very open, democratic structure.
| + | When uploading images, one has no choice for the licence. This should be fixed. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 15:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | The best way to get them involved is if there is no obstruction to them making tiny edits to begin with (typos, references, etc); later they may contribute a whole article.<br> <b>Insisting on user registration and email verification is a big obstruction,</b> and against the open source spirit. Wikipedia does not insist on this. | + | And I do not mean that there is only one choice. The list to choose among is **'''empty'''**. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 13:41, 1 May 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | Of course we all fear (highly motivated and energetic) cranks, or people with bias or malice. But the lesson of democratic projects is to always trust the community. As Arend Bayer pointed out to me, contributors usually police their own contributions assiduously, quickly removing any bad alterations.
| + | == convert html letters to unicode == |
| | | | |
| − | <b>I vote for opening this site up completely.</b> If problems arise, I imagine they can be corrected quickly and painlessly. If not, we could introduce some milder controls. For instance, every page could be attached to an editor, and alterations could automatically go via the editor before appearing online.
| + | We should perform a mass replacement of things like "&uuml;" bu "ü" and "&egrave;" by "è", etc. |
| | | | |
| − | Eventually this site will (hopefully) be so heavily used as to be self-policing. In the beginning I can understand the desire for some form of control, but it risks setting the wrong tone and alienating precisely the most important people we need working on this site: young, open-source types who have a different mindset from us old fogeys. I can't imagine many of the most prodigious young contributors to mathoverflow putting up with our rules, yet many of them have written thorough and lengthy answers to mathoverflow questions that would make excellent EoM articles in themselves.
| + | Also we should format the references tables for human source-code reading. |
| | | | |
| − | Richard (--[[User:Rpwt|Rpwt]] 18 April 2012)
| + | [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 09:03, 19 March 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | : "...and alterations could automatically go via the editor before appearing online" — such way is tried on [http://knowino.org/wiki/ Knowino]; there, alterations appear online immediately, but the reader is warned that they are unchecked, and has the option to switch to the last checked version. But it is technically equally possible to do the opposite. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 07:45, 19 April 2012 (CEST) | + | :and maybe more importantly, the same for converting &gt; to ">" in latex code. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 09:03, 10 November 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | == Figures == | + | == allow STL files for 3D surface plots == |
| | | | |
| − | I see that there are a few figures in the EoM, mostly they seem to be low-quality scans from the paper edition, so I guess that at some point they will need to be redrawn.
| + | As this would be very convenient, for example to illustrate [[Enneper surface]]. |
| − | * If there a list of all figures somewhere? I couldn't find it.
| |
| − | * It might be useful to have some graphical guidelines for common figure types (classical line geometry, graphs of functions and so on), such as font type (serif, typewriter, sans-serif?), font size, line thickness (especially for axes), ...
| |
| − | * It would be nice if high-quality vector formats (pdf, svg) were available as well as PNGs
| |
| − | * On WP they have the "commons" for storing and developing such figures. Perhaps EoM could do the same, or could create an niche on the WP commons to avoid the admin overhead.
| |
| − | --[[User:Jjg|Jjg]] 17:27, 19 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | : Hopefully, some day we'll have the "Asymptote" system (see [[User talk:Nbrothers#Requests for Software Extensions]], [http://ada00.math.uni-bielefeld.de/mediawiki/index.php/Asymptote_test example on test wiki], [http://asymptote.sourceforge.net the site of that system]) very useful when making pictures. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 07:53, 20 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | This is possible and used on wikipedia. |
| − | :: I'm not sure I'd see that as a great advantage -- of course everyone should be free to use the tool that they like to make a picture, but if those pictures are not in a standard format (pdf, svg, png) then they would not be so useful. Moreover, for any reasonably complex plot, running the asymptote interpreter on every page load seems a waste of resources. Are we to also add server-side generation for plots using MetaPost, xy-pic, POV-Ray,... ? --[[User:Jjg|Jjg]] 14:15, 20 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | ::: First, the wiki software is rather cute, it cashes pages so that they are not generated again if nothing could change. Second, separate pictures are also quite a mess; you must upload each, specify its license... and then they are not "wiki-wiki": if someone (be it you or not) wants to make a small change to it, then... what to do?? An "asymptotic" picture can be changed readily by anyone acquainted with "asymptote", just as a TeX formula can be changed readily by anyone acquainted with TeX. Third, an "asymptotic" picture on a wiki is a collective work (just as the wikitext) and therefore is not licensed separately. Fourth, of course, a picture may be too complex for "asymptote" and so made in pdf, svg, png — with the corresponding advantages and disadvantages. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 16:06, 20 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | :::: I'm paranoid about backups, and as a result I have never lost work to a hardware or OS failure. But I have lost work when I was depending on Open Source software whose maintainer decided to give up on the project and move on to other things (not that it matters, the projects were RLab, a matlab-like package, and emTeX). Consequently I am nervous about using small projects like asymptote (2 developers) for ''infrastructure''. Don't get me wrong, I think asymptote is a nice bit of software (not my favourite for drawing, but let 1000 flowers bloom ...), but are you sure it will be there in 30 years? PDF will be. SVG will be. Sure, if the developers abandon asymptote and move on, you can take the source and maintain it yourself, but will you? Or will it be easier to take the source for the 150 EoM plots made with asymptote and convert those to another format, cursing your younger self while you do it.
| |
| − | :::: --[[User:Jjg|Jjg]] 11:50, 21 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | ::::: I see; a problem indeed. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 13:36, 21 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | : With reference to a list of figures, I find that searching for "Fig" seems to do the trick and returns 202 hits --[[User:Jjg|Jjg]] 22:23, 22 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 18:18, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
| − | :: I have made a download of all pages to my local machine and did a count of the string "Figures:" which gave me a number of 731. It's good suggestion to set up a list of all such figures. Will try to do this when back home next week (travelling right now). --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 23:11, 22 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | :: Ok, a first try: [[User:Ulf Rehmann/figures]]. One may want a better format of this list, let me know what you think. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 00:10, 23 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | ::: Looks fine to me, there are many more than I expected (and some are going to be challenging to redraw). Perhaps this list could be used as a checkist (mark the link as "done" when the image is redrawn), or perhaps a <nowiki>{{FIG:done}}</nowiki> tag would be useful? --[[User:Jjg|Jjg]] 00:20, 23 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Manifold Atlas ==
| + | :This would also be useful for [[Parallelohedron]]. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 19:26, 5 October 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | A similar project (at least in the subfield of manifolds) was pointed out to me by Dima Panov: [http://www.map.him.uni-bonn.de/Main_Page the Manifold Atlas Project]. I imagine there are other such projects in other fields. We could consider using their material (properly cited), or asking its authors to contribute to EoM, or even merging with them ?
| + | == mediawiki update please == |
| | | | |
| − | Richard (--[[User:Rpwt|Rpwt]] 19 April 2012)
| + | We should upgrade the version of mediawiki. In particular, to benefit of better math fonts in the svg files. |
| | | | |
| − | : A good question... --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 07:56, 20 April 2012 (CEST) | + | [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 13:35, 1 May 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | == Hadamard theorem ==
| + | :And now it seems that we have lost the possibility to "search-and-replace" when editing pages. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 13:07, 23 February 2024 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | [[Hadamard theorem]] was quite a mess, so I fixed it up with TeX, referencing, and put the sections in more logical places. It seems like it would be better split up into different articles for each of the different theorems, however. If people agree, can this be done/can I do it myself? [[User:TBloom|TBloom]] 10:05, 21 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | == OldImage template created == |
| | | | |
| − | : As for me, yes, it would be better, and yes, you can do it yourself. :-) --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 11:09, 21 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | I have made a minimal <nowiki>{{OldImage}}</nowiki> template, that could be enhanced. |
| − | :: On the other hand, having all results on the same page may spare the reader from unnecessary clicking. Two-three screenfuls of text is an affordable size, not necessitating further splitting. [[User:Yakovenko|Sergei Yakovenko]] 07:58, 22 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | I'm also not sure how to label equations - Wikipedia suggests NumBlk but the package seems to be missing. [[User:TBloom|TBloom]] 10:09, 21 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | See [[:Template:OldImage]] and pages linked to the template. |
| | | | |
| − | : But we have MathJax! See [[User:Boris Tsirelson/sandbox1|here]] for an example. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 11:09, 21 April 2012 (CEST)
| + | [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 10:12, 12 October 2023 (UTC) |
| | | | |
| − | == Divisor == | + | == Allowed outer links == |
| | | | |
| − | Carlo Madonna pointed out that a search for "divisor" brings up only the page
| + | Maybe somebody should refresh the list of allowed external links. My recent changes to templates seem to trigger the captchas when editing every single page. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 11:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC) |
| − | [http://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php/Divisor Divisor], and not the page | |
| − | [http://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php/Divisor(2) Divisor(2)]. | |
| | | | |
| − | Can this be fixed somehow ? An obvious fix would be to change the titles (to, say, "Divisor (of an integer)" and "Divisor (ring theory and algebraic geometry)") but I don't know how to do that.
| + | : In particular, please allow the external links to OEIS, as in the OEIS template. [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 07:28, 7 November 2023 (UTC) |
| − | Richard (--[[User:Rpwt|Rpwt]] 22 April 2012)
| |
| | | | |
| − | : Ho do you search? If searched using the page [[Special:Search]], the page "Divisor(2)" does appear as well in the popup window (second entry) as within the search results as 9th page (out of 10), searched within namespace "Main" (scroll down search results!). If I put in the keyword "divisor" on the main page, "Divisor(2)" as well is shown in the popup window as second entry (tested with Chromium and Firefox). | + | ::and the same for the DOI template, please ! [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 09:27, 10 November 2023 (UTC) |
| − | : However, such things should be handled by a [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation "disambiguation page"]]. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 08:40, 23 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | : Pages can be "moved", see the upper-right corner of the menu (triangle to the right of "View history"), but this creates a redirect. I do not know if it is possible (and then how) to delete existing pages... [[User:Yakovenko|Sergei Yakovenko]] 07:03, 23 April 2012 (CEST) | + | :Even the MR link is problematic, so please take action! [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 08:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC) |
| − | :: We cannot delete pages, but Ulf (being admin) can; ask him [[User_talk:Ulf_Rehmann#Obsolete_pages|here]]. --[[User:Boris Tsirelson|Boris Tsirelson]] 07:38, 23 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| − | ::: Then it could be a good idea to '''warn the new editors''' (especially novices) to be very careful when creating new pages, exploring instead the possibility of editing the old ones... [[User:Yakovenko|Sergei Yakovenko]] 08:22, 23 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | :::: These seem to be the pages which have "divisor" within its title:
| + | == using a better search engine == |
| − | :::: [[Additive divisor problem]] | [[Divisor]] | [[Divisor(2)]] | [[Divisor class group]] | [[Divisorial ideal]] | [[Divisor problems]] | [[Elementary divisors]] | [[Greatest common divisor]] | [[Number of divisors]] | [[Poincare divisor]] | [[Poincaré divisor]] | [[Unit divisor]] | [[Zero divisor]]
| |
| − | :::: In case somebody sets up a disambiguation page for "divisor", please consider this list. --[[User:Ulf Rehmann|Ulf Rehmann]] 08:58, 23 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | ::::: I just used the searcher in the main page. If you digit "diviso.." then you get few suggestions including the Divisor(2), but, when you finish to digit "divisor" then only the "divisor" link is suggested and you are redirected to the page on "divisor of an integer".
| + | Maybe we could install the ''CirrusSearch'' extension ? It offers better search capabilities and in particular case-sensitive search. |
| − | ::::: Once you are in this page nowhere appears a link for example to Divisor(2), or Divisor in a variety ... . I am very new to all this, even I did not succeed to find the link to the "special search" web-page.
| |
| − | ::::: I will check more. --[[User:Carlo.madonna|Carlo Madonna]] 10:22, 23 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
| | | | |
| − | == Generated reference labels ==
| + | https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:CirrusSearch |
| | | | |
| − | The emacs macro which converts old-style references to new works quite well, but could I flag a couple of issues
| + | [[User:Chapoton|F. Chapoton]] ([[User talk:Chapoton|talk]]) 08:55, 23 November 2023 (UTC) |
| − | * Where the transliteration of the original Russian author and the transliteration used in the translation of a Russian author's name differ, the latter is give in square brackets: eg (from [[Ill-posed problems]]) A.N. Tikhonov, V.I. [V.I. Arsenin] Arsenine, "Solution of ill-posed problems", Winston (1977). Then the emacs macro uses the name in the brackets to generate the label, in the above, [TiArAr], which seems a bit silly.
| |
| − | * There are several pages with references like [label] "Title" Editor (ed), Editor (ed) (i.e., there is no author preceeding the title) which fail to be processed by the script, examples are in [[Shannon sampling theorem]] and [[Travelling salesman problem]]
| |
| − | --[[User:Jjg|Jjg]] 14:17, 23 April 2012 (CEST)
| |
This project is based on an electronic version of the "Encyclopaedia
of Mathematics", published by Kluwer Academic Publishers until 2003,
and by Springer after that. The encyclopaedia goes back to the Soviet
Matematicheskaya entsiklopediya (1977), originally edited by Ivan
Matveevich Vinogradov.
The electronic version had its formulae written in $\rm \TeX$, which
were saved as png images. On its way through the various publishers
the original $\rm \TeX$ source code was lost, therefore, to edit a
formula in one of these original pages requires to retype the
code for that formula from scratch.
For the project, it will be of big help to transcribe the old pages.
To make this easy, it was decided to use MathJax,
which allows to use Plain $\rm \TeX$ or $\rm \LaTeX$ for formulae encoding.
Some help on this is given on the help pages.
The installed software and extensions for this project can be seen here:
Special:Version. This collection may be updated and extended.
Archives
Discussions older than year 2020 have been moved to
Talk:EoM:This project/Archive 1
Please add comments and suggestions as a new section below.
Problems with auto-encoding
The automatic encoding process seems to badly garble pages with cases: where one would expect a left lbrace without matching right rbrace. Examples are Weibull distribution and Walsh system where there is corrupt TeX and text has gone missing. Richard Pinch (talk) 16:14, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, that's right: The markup sources the encoding is based upon are partially scrambled (exactly what you are saying, missing 'silent' right braces). However, this is a systematic error and will be fixed soon. As an example, I have just fixed the pages you mention above, but there are quite a few more, will come back to this soon.
- Thanks for mentioning this, Richard. Let me know it you find more such systematic errors - I often can find+fix them easily by my bots. --Ulf Rehmann (talk) 17:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
The automatic encoding seems to miss out Tex in references. There are a lot of references to $K$-theory and $p$-adic numbers, for example. Richard Pinch (talk) 16:22, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, right as well: The markup sources generally do miss the $\TeX$ encoding for the references (I don't know why). This either has to be replaced by hand (or possibly by my old bot to enrich the references by MR/ZBL links, which would get the titles as encoded by MR and thereby replacing the png images by mathjax encoding - but I should find the time to adjust these bots to the new software situation). --Ulf Rehmann (talk) 17:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
There's also a problem with braces around sub- and superscripts. I have seen examples, such as Space over an algebra, of $x^{-1}$ being rendered as $x^{-}1$, $\sum_{j=1}$ as $\sum_{j=}1$ and so on. Richard Pinch (talk) 16:59, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
There's a stray word size in the commutative diagrams at Diagram, Spectral homology, Triple. Richard Pinch (talk) 18:36, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
A stray down 2 in the subscripts at Modular curve. Richard Pinch (talk) 18:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Translation of SL for special linear group should be mathrm not mathop, as the latter produces curious results for $SL_2$ in display mode. Richard Pinch (talk) 18:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
It seems that when a text phrase in parentheses follows a formula, the space is in the wrong place, that is after the opening parenthesis rather than before, such as the third line of Stability of characteristic exponents. Richard Pinch (talk) 12:53, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
The ellipsis $,\ldots,$ is often rendered as $\ldots$, that is, without the commas. Richard Pinch (talk) 16:37, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
There are a few articles with a mysterious word riangle in formulae which don't seem to render properly. I think it's some form of triangle. Richard Pinch (talk) 14:22, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
- I've dealt with all of these, I think. Richard Pinch (talk) 11:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
In Kripke models there's an unrecognised symbol $\hul$ which appears to be something to do with a version of $\leftrightharpoons$. Richard Pinch (talk) 14:23, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
The encoding bold cdot occurs in several articles: I suspect $\bullet$ is intended. Richard Pinch (talk) 18:42, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Mysterious Young and spd at Young diagram. Richard Pinch (talk) 21:47, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
There are also stray occurrences of tilde in some places. Richard Pinch (talk) 18:22, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
An issue with stray occurrences of words like this is that it's hard to search for them. I can't find a way of searching for the word "tilde", say, that does not also return occurrences of the latex command with the preceding backslash. Richard Pinch (talk) 11:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Semi-automatic encoding
Please also let me know about any potential problems that occur for articles that are texified with the "semi-automatic" method. --Maximilian Janisch (talk) 16:48, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- In the article Stochastic process, generalized, the automatic texification made a few mistakes relating to parenthesized expressions in exponents: $ X ^ {(}n) $ vs. $ X ^ {(n)} $. AxelBoldt (talk) 22:03, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- This appears to be an issue with the automatic (not the semi-automatic) encoding, and I‘m afraid that it may have happened in other articles too 😅. —Maximilian Janisch (talk) 22:22, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, this is another aspect of my comment dated 16:59, 7 June 2020 a few lines above. It is unfortunately rather common. Richard Pinch (talk) 07:07, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Just found this page, and this section seems to cover most of the problems that I've been correcting manually, see Maximilian's talk. Thanks! Liuyao (talk) 17:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Favicon
This is a "beautification" section.
Has there ever been a discussion on the possibility of using a favicon for the website EoM? I believe it would be beneficial to the cementation of the website, as well improve its general appearance. --Mihir Narayanan (talk) 00:23, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, but to no avail yet: See this. - Ulf Rehmann (talk) 05:18, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
- I think I could make a favicon .ico file using an illusrtration software, with a design representing the phrase "E of M". Would you like me to do so? --Mihir Narayanan (talk) 00:23, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- I have added this to my list of things to do. --Maximilian Janisch (talk) 09:15, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Mathematical X vs X, mathematical
We have articles Mathematical ecology, Mathematical economics, Mathematical linguistics, Mathematical morphology, Mathematical physics, Mathematical programming, Mathematical statistics on the one hand, and Abstraction, mathematical, Crystallography, mathematical, Model, mathematical on the other. I would suggest a common style of "Mathematical X", which is the majority, moving the minority. Richard Pinch (talk) 17:48, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
A similar comment applies to Algebra, fundamental theorem of versus Fundamental theorem of calculus. The latter incidentally rather oddly redirects to Newton-Leibniz formula where the Fundamental Theorem is mentioned in a rather odd way. I would suggest a move of the former to Fundamental theorem of algebra. Richard Pinch (talk) 19:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Way forward?
What are the next steps for the project? Richard Pinch (talk) 16:24, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Richard, I will note that there is a small list of things that might be worth a look at here. On another note, I was busy this year with writing my master's thesis (I will presumably obtain my master's at the end of this September), so I haven't kept track of the EoM much. I hope that I'll be able to be more active again in the future, Maximilian --Maximilian Janisch (talk) 15:20, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
While acknowledging the sterling work of the few people who have been contributing over the past couple of years, I wonder whether it is time to agree that the project has come to a natural conclusion? To revive it means building up a community with a number of contributors, and, just as importantly, setting a direction for the many topics that are under- or even un-represented. If there's any interest for getting that editorial work done, possibly via some sort of meeting or workshop, I would be willing to help promote it. I believe funds might be available. Richard Pinch (talk) 13:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
- I see that a lot of old posting have been archived. There are some questions of mine in that tranche that are still formally active, in the sense that they have never been answered, but they required either direction from members of the editorial board or a vigorous debate among the working editors, and I'm sorry to say that neither of those ever happened. That's one of the reasons why I'm rather pessimistic about the future of this project. I first raised this question a couple of years ago, and there has been no real answer.
- It seems to me there are three possible routes.
- 1. Acknowledge that the project represents a view of mathematics at a certain set of points in time, and close it off with a minimal amount of tidying up.
- 2. Acknowledge that Wikipedia has, for better or worse, occupied the space the project might have occupied, and seek to merge it into Wikipedia. This would require a medium amount of effort, but there are many volunteers there.
- 3. Try to bring the project up to date. This would require a lot of effort, and that has to be either paid for or someone has to think of a reason why volunteers would take part (rather than on Wikipedia, say). Indeed, simply scoping out the gaps that have opened up in the past decades and drawing up a list of necessary new articles would in itself be a major project requiring effort from a group of people at a quite high level: one thinks of a conference or workshp convened by the editorial board members and others, for example. That's before anyone tries to find the resources for writing those missing articles. Perhaps the EMS might take it on as a major project. It's very far beyond what can be crowd-sourced by a handful of volunteers, however well-meaning and active.
- But someone has to decide to take action, make a case and coordinate effort. Without that initiative, the project is by default choosing option (1), to close itself down more or less gracefully.
Richard Pinch (talk) 16:32, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Get rid of Springer logo ?
Maybe one should now get rid of the prominent Springer logo, but keep only some sentence somewhere about the history ?
And also we should get rid of the cookies. Who needs cookies here ?
Chapoton (talk) 20:26, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
- Cookies warnings are still there, despite some claims to the contrary. F. Chapoton (talk) 09:50, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
MSC template link is broken ✅
The first link in the MSC template is currently broken. See for example on top of Arithmetic number. It should probably be removed, keeping only the MathSciNet and ZentralBlatt links.
I would like to add an OEIS template linking to https://oeis.org/ (done ✅)
F. Chapoton (talk) 09:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- And for course, it should be MSC2020, not MSC2010. F. Chapoton (talk) 08:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC) ✅
- And the MSN and ZBL templates themselves are sometimes called with several codes, which leads nowhere. F. Chapoton (talk) 13:37, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- And the broken MSC link now points to a borked website, with spam. F. Chapoton (talk) 16:51, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- The MSN templates have been fixed now. Please report any issues. F. Chapoton (talk) 09:51, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
"How to cite" link should use https
At the bottom of every page, it still uses "http".
F. Chapoton (talk) 09:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
I have no idea where this is configured. This does not seem to be a template. F. Chapoton (talk) 09:48, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- For a random example, see Jet. F. Chapoton (talk) 10:19, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
Zbl is now free ✅
So we should change the little padlock icon besides the ZBL link in the ZBL template.
F. Chapoton (talk) 10:03, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- Unless the padlock icon means an exterior link ? F. Chapoton (talk) 14:30, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
I see that the padlock is for https links, so nothing to change after all. F. Chapoton (talk) 07:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
The DOI template should use https ✅
Because this is now the standard way to go.
F. Chapoton (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done, fixed. F. Chapoton (talk) 09:46, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
How can one find the list of articles containing an empty comment section ? How to get rid of them in some automatic way ?
Where can I find documentation on the API for the encyclopedia ?
F. Chapoton (talk) 13:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
ISBN template
We may like to have an IBSN template, as this appears in some references. But what should it link to ?
F. Chapoton (talk) 14:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
- We could link to wikipedia tool for ISBN, namely "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/". F. Chapoton (talk) 09:05, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- The ISBN template doesn't currently exist, so using it means that the ISBN is no longer visible. At present, then, trying to use it is a step backwards. Richard Pinch (talk) 08:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- Hopefully, it will exists very soon. I am waiting for somebody to come back from holidays and give me the rights to create templates. F. Chapoton (talk) 08:39, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
The ISBN template has now been filled in a minimal way, just displaying the data. If we like, we can make it a link to something. Any preference or opinion ? F. Chapoton (talk) 09:43, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
We could also link to the page https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-2-26-702700-6 . F. Chapoton (talk) 19:46, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- One should now proceed with au automated search-and-remplace to apply the ISBN template in all possible places. F. Chapoton (talk) 08:12, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Uploading images
When uploading images, one has no choice for the licence. This should be fixed. F. Chapoton (talk) 15:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
And I do not mean that there is only one choice. The list to choose among is **empty**. F. Chapoton (talk) 13:41, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
convert html letters to unicode
We should perform a mass replacement of things like "ü" bu "ü" and "è" by "è", etc.
Also we should format the references tables for human source-code reading.
F. Chapoton (talk) 09:03, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- and maybe more importantly, the same for converting > to ">" in latex code. F. Chapoton (talk) 09:03, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
allow STL files for 3D surface plots
As this would be very convenient, for example to illustrate Enneper surface.
This is possible and used on wikipedia.
F. Chapoton (talk) 18:18, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- This would also be useful for Parallelohedron. F. Chapoton (talk) 19:26, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
mediawiki update please
We should upgrade the version of mediawiki. In particular, to benefit of better math fonts in the svg files.
F. Chapoton (talk) 13:35, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
- And now it seems that we have lost the possibility to "search-and-replace" when editing pages. F. Chapoton (talk) 13:07, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
OldImage template created
I have made a minimal {{OldImage}} template, that could be enhanced.
See Template:OldImage and pages linked to the template.
F. Chapoton (talk) 10:12, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
Allowed outer links
Maybe somebody should refresh the list of allowed external links. My recent changes to templates seem to trigger the captchas when editing every single page. F. Chapoton (talk) 11:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- In particular, please allow the external links to OEIS, as in the OEIS template. F. Chapoton (talk) 07:28, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- and the same for the DOI template, please ! F. Chapoton (talk) 09:27, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- Even the MR link is problematic, so please take action! F. Chapoton (talk) 08:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
using a better search engine
Maybe we could install the CirrusSearch extension ? It offers better search capabilities and in particular case-sensitive search.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:CirrusSearch
F. Chapoton (talk) 08:55, 23 November 2023 (UTC)