User talk:IntegralPython/sandbox/Fractal measure

Gauge function

So, If I read down to the bottom of Hausdorff measure, it has a section called generalizations, which introduces "gauge functions", which links to dimension function. All of this is duplicating what you are writing here, with the exception that you have added an interesting statement about balls (I've seen that before, it does show up in assorted texts). I'm wondering if it might be better to just place the statement about balls into the article on dimension function and/or extend the Hausdorff measure article?

Here's what I'm thinking: as a reader (not a writer) when there are two or three wikipedia articles saying very similar things, with only minor differences, it can be very exhausting to read all of them, carefully compare them, and try to figure out how they differ (or if they differ). It's easy to misread, make mistakes, misunderstand. My concern with this article is that it's yet another article that says "almost the same thing", but maybe not quite... It might be better to just expand the "generalizations" section of Hausdorff measure until it gets bigger and bigger until it's so big its about to burst, and then it can be split out into it's own article. I suspect this is not what you want to hear, but it's ... well, its where I'm coming from. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 04:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, in the end I'm fine with such an evaluation such as that of redirecting this page to generalizations of Hausdorff. Making the fractal measure idea part of the generalizations section of Hausdorff measure was actually my original idea, but when I brought it up someone mentioned a style guideline that seemed to indicate the creation of the page. I'm okay with a merge as long as a) the new information that isn't duplicate can be added, and b) the term fractal measure finds a place somewhere in the article it's merged to, since I've read quite a bit of literature referring to it as such._{Integral Python}^{click here to argue with me} 11:04, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]