Talk:Projective geometry axioms

Rationale
I am just not sure I understand the rationale for having a separate page on this topic. Wouldn't make more sense just to add a section to Projective space? --Michael Kinyon 20:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Kinyon. Also, the name "axiomatic projective space" is not a real technical term, to my knowledge. It is just called a projective geometry. This page should be merged into Projective space Zaslav 01:48, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

I see it the same way, there should be 1 big article containing all the different concepts for projective spaces. Iadded in the bigger article a small paragraph and reference to this one for now.--Kmhkmh 06:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Title

 * If we want to keep this page, I would suggest renaming it Axioms of projective geometry. I created a section on the Projective geometry article, moved stuff in there and added some more, and it is now quite long. This discussion has moved to Talk:Projective_space -- Steelpillow (talk) 21:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Now I understand better, I have renamed it 'Finite projective geometry. If I get time, I'll move/add a bit more of that stuff here, e.g. Coxeter's axioms only allow a larger minimal PG[m,n] than the usual PG[2,2] comprising 7 points and 7 lines. -- Cheers, Steelpillow 21:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)