Talk:Associated prime

Commutative setting

Is this commutative wikipedia? If not, I wonder why this article discusses associated primes only in the commutative setting. Liransh Talk 17:17, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I am vastly amused by this specificity of this complaint. DS (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, the article mentions that in the commutative setting, they are linked to Noether-Lasker decomposition. I think this is a little bit narrow. It is true that the associated primes are the radicals of Noether-Lasker components, but it is also true that given any finite irreducible decomposition in any commutative ring, the radicals of the components are the associated primes. The existence theorem requires Noetherianness, but the uniqueness claims of the Noether-Lasker theorem are much more general. 71.227.119.236 (talk) 17:34, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Assassinator

The disambiguation page for Assassinator reads in part, "Assassinator may refer to Associated prime" and redirects to this page. If Assassinator and Associated prime are synonymous, then why is this not documented and supported with citations in the Associated prime page? — Anita5192 (talk) 22:08, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

@Anita5192: I have just seen this old post. I have edited the article for fixing that. In fact, it seems that, in English, "assassinator" has a slightly different meaning, and that this is mainly a French terminology. It seems also that I am the one who has introduced this terminology, in my papers "Autour de la platitude" and "Ass des modules plats". By the way, the latter article was originally entitled "Assassins des modules plats" (killers of flat modules), but the editor refused such a joke in the title. D.Lazard (talk) 11:42, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! I think it is more clear now. — Anita5192 (talk) 16:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)