Talk:Inverse

Length and ease of use
This disambiguation page is too long and tedious to use. Any ideas or precedents for making it better? --Commander Keane 12:26, 1 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I am afraid it has got even longer, I merged in invert, inversion, and inverted. At least we now have everything together, I found it confusing to have such closely related terms separately.--Patrick 22:31, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I object strenuously to this merger. The terms inversion and inverse in widely varying fields do not belong on the same page. I'm for re-establishing a page for the term inversion. Tmangray 17:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The page has become too large and cumbersome. It could be split with cross referencing linksChevin (talk) 14:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Inverse perspective?
There is nothing on inverse perspective at perspective (graphical). Might it be removed? --Zemylat 02:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

MOSDAB/Inverse
Could you explain what still needs to be cleaned up on Talk:Inverse? Just a short explanation would be good... as far as I can tell, it's formatted properly according to WP:MOSDAB, so it's not clear what work still needs to be done. --Interiot 21:34, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, I think it's just still too hard to find anything e.g. the 2 categories I added, science and mathematics, may be a little weak. I'm sure there's a better way to arrange it -- I just don't know what it is. Also some entries may not really need to be here e.g. antonym, anitmatter; they might be examples of a kind of inversion, but does anyone call them that? And who would be coming to this page looking for Terminology of homosexuality? Ewlyahoocom 22:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Inversion / Eversion
There should be a definition about inversion/eversion. They refer to anatomical movements. Inversion is rotation of the feet so that the soles face each other. Eversion is rotation of the feet so the soles face away from each other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.183.0.83 (talk) 13:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I believe you are correct about this. However, prior to adding this, mention of both terms should be added to the ankle article, specifically in the ankle section, which currently only listed plantar and dorsi flexion. We both know the joint is more complex than this, so first add the other methods of articulation concepts to that article, and once that is finalized and accepted, redirection references to them from this article can be placed. Tyciol (talk) 03:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)