User talk:TakuyaMurata

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
See the page history to retrieve old talks.

Dear Takuya Murata,

thanks for your edits of the Wikipedia entry "Urs Schreiber"!

I was wondering if you might have some energy left to edit. There is a Wikipedia page for the "nLab". As you probably know, this is a wiki for research mathematics which I had once created (on November 28, 2008). Maybe it would make good sense to link to that from the page with my name?

Also, if people wonder about book publications, maybe this here would help to point to?

In any case, many thanks for your time. With best regards, Urs Schreiber (talk) 15:55, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

It's cool to be contacted by the actual subject of the article. I've added a link to nLab, and started a publication list section, which should establish the "notability" (inclusion criterion in wikipedia), using a link you provided.
Thank you for the suggestion!
-- Taku (talk) 13:46, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks that you found the time to do this. I know that you have better things to do. Let me know if I might ever return the favor in some way.
Urs Schreiber (talk) 16:28, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
(Since you asked). There has been a speculation as to your nationality, something wikipedia editors care about :) It would thus help if you tell about your nationality somewhere, say, in your website. -- Taku (talk) 17:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)


Hi Taku: I'm hoping to ask you for some feedback on an ad-hoc chart I'm drawing. Don't worry, it's not for Wikipedia. I just need someone who is well versed in commutative rings! If you find the time, take a look at this googledoc pdf. I have charts like this which are even more extensive for noncommutative rings, but these nice commutative conditions like Gorenstein and Cohen-Macaulay did not fit well there, so I'm doing a more dedicated chart.

I'm sure I've left out implications and/or things that are worth including. Whatever suggestions you can make about additions or omissions, I'd be interested in hearing. One thing I'm curious about is if regular rings are Gorenstein. The only information I found was that regular local rings are Gorenstein. Another thing I wonder about is if you can connect Cohen-Macaulay downward to other conditions on the chart. I just have no feeling for these types of rings. Please also browse that family of domains over on the left. That is also a new addition. Thanks: Rschwieb (talk) 01:38, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Ah, ok! I'm glad it is not a rigid thing in commutative algebra. Exclusive definitions are certainly aesthetically unpleasing. I do indeed prefer the definition of "commutative hereditary domain." I've been taking a long look at the list of rings above that I didn't incorporate yet. The excellent-catenary-G-J2-Nagata-geometrically regular cluster looks very cohesive and makes a good chart, although I have no idea how it connects to the other things (except "Noetherian"). I haven't placed Zariski or Henselian rings yet. I've started a local chart too, and that needs a lot of work. I'll have to remember to push them out soon for feedback. Rschwieb (talk) 15:04, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
It just occurred to me "dimension theory" might be a reason you want to exclude a zero-dimensional ring (since a Hilbert polynomial will have negative degree.) "Geometrically," curves and points are fundamentally different after all. Anyway and by the way, are you interested in creating a chart for Nagata ring and such for Wikipedia? I found this stuff very confusing and I and some other readers can definitely use such a chart to make sense of a big picture. -- Taku (talk) 00:14, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Here are some updated charts for you to look at. I'm not sure I could make a chart small or pretty enough for use on those pages, but I would be perfectly willing to make one if the right subgraph was worked out.
Commutative rings:
Local rings:
The cluster I haven't included yet: Rschwieb (talk) 18:06, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Wondering if you overlooked this update or not! In the meantime, I've added complete intersection rings between regular local and local Gorenstein. Rschwieb (talk) 20:13, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Goop (newsletter)[edit]

Hello TakuyaMurata,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Goop (newsletter) for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Ging287 (talk) 00:14, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Law of Economy of Characters for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Law of Economy of Characters is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Brainy J ~~ (talk) 17:07, 10 April 2014 (UTC)


Notice WMF's usual non-answer answer.

Actually, I think that the thing for you to notice in that thread is that "the WMF" hasn't answered at all. Every person speaking in that thread is speaking purely as fellow volunteers—some to notice that the development of math software is controlled by volunteers; others complain that, despite being good at math, they still can't understand most math articles; still others to suggest ways and means of improving the situation. But there is no reply from "the WMF" anywhere in that discussion. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:15, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

I did notice that the comment in that thread was from User:WhatamIdoing rather than User:Whatamidoing (WMF). But I didn't notice any comment in the thread to the effect that "the development of math software is controlled by volunteers". Who said that? Deltahedron (talk) 17:31, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
You did: "that currently WMF allocates essentially no resources to this and it continues entirely on volunteer effort". WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:34, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
I nowhere stated that volunteers control mathematical software development: indeed I specifically wrote that volunteer effort is less effective through not being integrated into WMF development. This is a reference to the complaint made here for example. Deltahedron (talk) 19:53, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
The volunteers are the ones doing the work, and therefore they are controlling the work. The WMF does not and (in practice) cannot control WP:VOLUNTEERs. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:37, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Not what I said, not what I meant and not correct (see the diff). Deltahedron (talk) 21:01, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Ok, maybe it should have been "non-answer non-answer". I also missed the distinction between WhatamIdoing and WhatamIdoing (WMF). In any case, my point still stands: Deltahedron asked a rather pointed question about the math rendering issue and got no-answer. We should continue the discussion at Jimbo's talk but I would say for the record Deltahedron's inquire "represents" to a large extent the voice of the math editor community if I understand correctly (certainly mine.) -- Taku (talk) 20:28, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Or perhaps even more accurately: "There has been no official answer yet, despite this thread being open for an entire day and a half already". WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:37, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Or even more accurately still: Jimbo Wales has answered with an interesting challenge which I have relayed to WT:WPM. Deltahedron (talk) 20:56, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Example in article on Finitely generated modules[edit]

Hi, I recently posted a question about an example in the article on Finitely generated modules. I think you originally contributed this example (along with a ton of great additions to the article overall!), so I thought you might be able to clarify my confusion. Thanks! Tesseran (talk) 18:09, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Narabunka Women's College[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Narabunka Women's College has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not comply with notability guidelines for schools.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 08:19, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Narabunka College[edit]

You're right. I must have confused it with college in another language, a primary school. Regards. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 11:21, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Fine tuning[edit]

I look forward to hearing your reasoning here. Deltahedron (talk) 20:02, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


for your prompt response on Central polynomial and Posner's theorem! Deltahedron (talk) 06:31, 28 June 2014 (UTC)