Talk:Small cancellation theory

There are two active mathematicians named Olshanski. An initial should be included here for the purposes of disambiguation. Katzmik (talk) 15:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It is true that there is more than one Ol'shanskii in mathematics (same for Gromov, Novikov, Schupp, Wise, etc), but I think that in all cases where the name is mentioned, there is a footnote to a publication containing his initials. I think this is quite good enough in terms of disambiguation. Basically, it is a question of uniformity of style: either first names/initials should be provided for all names when they are mentioned or for no names. I perfer the second option, for aesthetic reasons. putting in initials everywhere looks more cluttered, and, as I said, footnoted references take care of the disambiguation issue. It would be even better to create a bio article for Ol'shanskii and have a wikilink to it when his name is mentioned. Nsk92 (talk) 15:35, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I have added Ol'shanskii's first name (Alexander) to where he is mentioned in the History section. Nsk92 (talk) 15:46, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Quick issues
I'm new to this theory so I don't know the answers:
 * T(q) claims to be defined for q=3, but then we require 3≤t3?
 * Under Other basic properties it says all these groups have solvable word problem, including "C(T)-T(4)". This looks like a typo (the first T should be a number? Or did I miss the definition of C(T)?) but I don't know how to fix it. And by the way, does Dehn's algorithm work in all these (I know it does in the first two classes), or is it some variant? Staecker (talk) 01:42, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I've never heard of C(T) either, so I have changed it to C(4), which is correct. T(3) means that every vertex has valency at least 3.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richpark (talk • contribs) 13:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Minashot (talk) 16:54, 8 December 2009 (UTC) According to the definition, T(3) is a statement about the empty set of words, and thus this condition holds in any group. This amounts to saying that the valency of every internal vertex in a diagram is either two, or at least three, which is evidently the case.