Talk:From Action to Mathematics per Mac Lane

Omissions from this table that come to my mind: modules, vector spaces, functional analysis.Palnot (talk) 00:27, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The title of this article seems inappropriate. For one thing, according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style, there shouldn't be all those capital letters unless it's a proper name or there's some other specific reason for capitalizing. For another, Wikipedia article titles should be as prosaic and descriptive as possible; they're definitely not supposed to be like book titles or the like. Maybe something like "MacLane's philosophy of mathematics" would be suitable. Michael Hardy (talk) 16:42, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to change the title to something you would prefer. My attitude when choosing the present title was definitely one of "keep it as prosaic and descriptive as possible." Keep in mind that the material in this entry is only a small part of Mac Lane's overall philosophy of mathematics. (I implore you to read Form and Function and Where Mathematics Comes From!) Palnot (talk) 07:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating (no really, hugely fascinating) but ... [a] this as written really seems like 'original research,' and so ought to be deleted. See WP:NOR. Even though it's referenced, it feels approximately like a one-page dissertation proposal (one I'd be very interested in reading!) [b] if rewritten to fit into "No Original Research" (and I bet it can, maybe just a retitle), I propose it be merged into either the article on Mac Lane or somewhere into a philosophy of mathematics article. The relevant justification in WP:MM is that this article requires too much Context. Rick lightburn (talk) 17:04, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]