Talk:Nice name

Merger proposal

Is it not enough that I have changed the category for this article from "Set theory" to "Forcing"? What benefit is there to merging it entirely into Forcing (mathematics)? JRSpriggs 08:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I only proposed it in response to the insufficient context comment. Jason22 23:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was hard tp find much to say so perhaps it should go into Forcing (mathematics). Ansatz (talk) 05:35, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    See no reason not too. --174.110.141.178 (talk) 01:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficient context in introduction?

To my mind, the introduction is fine. Nobody will understand the article who doesn't have a graduate-level degree in mathematics -- I don't think it's possible to write an accessible introduction.

Dricherby 10:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree. It actually introduces the term in a loose way before getting into the technicalities. On one hand, one could certainly write a far better introduction, that puts this method into wider context, the big picture if you will. On the other hand, that's something that would only happen in a better written article and most articles on Wikipedia (including many non-technical ones) do not meet that high standard. For a stub, it's certainly ok, so I'm removing the tag.

s/khan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.199.179.232 (talk) 06:23, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name isn't defined here, so perhaps someone could define that and then go on to that. Alternately, maybe we could move this to a 'name' article and redirect 'nice name' there so that there is sufficient information? Chimpionspeak (talk) 05:44, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]