Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 189.6.212.77 (talk) at 05:00, 2 April 2015 (→Draft:Sabir Gusein-Zade: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is a discussion page for
WikiProject Mathematics
This page is devoted to discussions of issues relating to mathematics articles on Wikipedia. Related discussion pages include:
3
Please add new topics at the bottom of the page and sign your posts.

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used

Template:Sfrac

What are our opinions on the template {{sfrac}}? This produces fractions in html, like ⁠a/b⁠. It was recently deployed at Pi. I have two concerns over the use: one is that it enlarges the line spacing between adjacent text lines, which overall is rather unsightly. Secondly, I noticed that in chrome on my mobile, the vinculum is the baseline of the surrounding text, which is much too low, giving inline expressions a very lopsided appearance. My impression was that once upon a time, we recommended against using PNGs that were tall enough to mess with the line spacing. If so, perhaps this template should indicate that it should only be used sparingly inline, if at all. The recent additions of the template at Pi seem rather gratuitous. For instance, ⁠22/7⁠ instead of a perfectly acceptable 22/7. Sławomir Biały (talk) 21:18, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:FRAC is the leading guideline. It allows both methods. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 22:19, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sławomir's question is about opinions of style (which could influence the MoS), not about what the MoS currently says. I share the concern about the template, and any other formatting that does not keep line spacing uniform. My Firefox browser on my mobile does something else that's even worse: it vertically stacks a 22 over a solidus over a vinculum over a 7, with a full line gap from previous line. I think that the MoS should prefer the 22/7 format in general due to the line spacing effect on all browsers. —Quondum 01:01, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In most inline equations, and certainly for 22/7, a solidus is superior to a vinculum. (In displayed equations, the vinculum may be superior.) A vinculum widens the vertical spacing and requires the numerator and denominator to be in a small font. If an equation would be easier to read with a vinculum, that's a sign that the equation should be displayed instead of being inline. For that reason I think the desirable uses of {{sfrac}} are highly limited. Ozob (talk) 14:34, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I tried another experiment to see how {{sfrac}} looks on the desktop versus mobile site. On the desktop site (as viewed from a mobile device), the vinculum is too low (as already noted). But on the mobile site, it is completely broken. See [1]. Sławomir Biały (talk) 15:21, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure where the right place to bring this up is. It seems to me that our MOS should not unreservedly recommend this template, since it is broken on the mobile site (which constitutes 30% of Wikipedia views). My suggestion is that the MOS should indicate this, and recommend that the template be used sparingly. Sławomir Biały (talk) 12:35, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The immediate thing to do is to have the thing fixed. A recommendation is MOS (while I support it) will only have a small and long term effect. There are potentially thousands (choose your prefix) of places where it is used today. Village pump? YohanN7 (talk) 12:55, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Fixed. Missing style in Mobile.css. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 13:11, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Did you see how easy and quick that was Do you actually mean this is fixed globally, or on your mobile? Your user profile indicates you actually can fix things like this... YohanN7 (talk) 13:58, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is fixed for anyone here on English Wikipedia. This edit fixed it. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 16:24, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kernel function for solving integral equation of surface radiation exchanges

What should be done with Kernel function for solving integral equation of surface radiation exchanges? I did a bunch of obvious copy-editing, and I hesitate to attempt to write a lead section. If the article ought to exist, a proper lead section should be added. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:42, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Serpentine curve

The article titled Serpentine curve is very short. There must be immensely more one can say about this topic. It is about curves whose equation is

Michael Hardy (talk) 23:43, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Addition has been nominated as a featured article

After passing its good article nomination a few weeks ago, I have nominated addition for featured article status. If it goes well, I would like to go through and improve some more of our Top Importance Good Articles and nominate them as featured articles, one at a time. If anyone is interested in helping out, let me know, especially since I have never tried a FA nomination before.Brirush (talk) 17:41, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I should mention that it may be helpful for members of the WikiProject Mathematics community to help with the review process (which needs input from many editors), pointing out deficiencies in the article or supporting its nomination. It may be difficult for editors in other areas to work through the abstract algebra sections, for instance.Brirush (talk) 21:44, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hilbert geometry

I've created a new disambiguation page titled Hilbert geometry, listing three items. Perhaps the present company can improve it. Michael Hardy (talk) 22:03, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Langlands

Dear mathematicians: There is an extensive article about this mathematician in today's Toronto Star. I have added a citation to his page, but more information from the article could be cited by someone whose math is less rusty. —Anne Delong (talk) 21:18, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Migration of {{cite arxiv}}

The {{Cite arXiv}} template is being updated to be more consistent with other citation templates. This is likely to introduce some red error messages in existing Cite arXiv templates that use unsupported parameters or that should be converted to {{Cite journal}}. Please see this discussion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:01, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should we delete Hamilton Mathematics Institute?

You can now opine at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hamilton_Mathematics_Institute. Michael Hardy (talk) 04:51, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Sabir Gusein-Zade

Hello. I wrote Draft:Sabir Gusein-Zade and it has been rejected twice. If someone here would like to help me to improve it so that it can be accepted I would be really grateful. Sorry about my bad English (it's not my native tongue you know...), I won't try to create articles again, but it will be sad to me if my work there (albeit modest) be deleted after the six months deadline... By the way, it seems that pages marked as "Draft:" are not shown by Google or Wikipedia searches in standard mode, making it difficult for other interested people to find them and maybe help to improve the drafts. Sincerely, --Rodrigo 189.6.212.77 (talk) 05:00, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics&oldid=654592129"