Template:Did you know nominations/Height function


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 19:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Height function

 * ... that height functions allow mathematicians to count and distinguish objects such as rational points of algebraic varieties? Source:
 * ALT1:... that height functions were central ideas in the proofs of the Mordell–Weil and Faltings's theorems about rational points of algebraic varieties? Source: and
 * ALT2:... that the unsolved Manin and Vojta conjectures about height functions of rational points of algebraic varieties have far-reaching implications in Diophantine approximation and arithmetic geometry? Source: and

Converted from a redirect by MarkH21 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC).


 * Comment: this was nominated eight days late by a first-time DYK nominator; as such, I'd like to suggest that we use our discretion, as we typically do with newcomers, to allow the nomination to proceed normally as if it had been nominated seven days after work began rather than fifteen. For future reference, it's better to nominate on time, within seven days of creation/conversion/expansion and then finish building the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:04, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm agreed that it's fine to accept this nomination. I'll review it. — Bilorv (he/him) (talk) 11:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that! I recognized that there is a 7 day limit but I also saw WP:DYKSG and I figured that the backlog isn't too great. I'll work on earlier nominations next time :) — MarkH21 (talk) 18:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking the time to review and provide feedback! I agree with your suggestions, so I added two Néron–Tate height references (including the one you mentioned) and added a basic example for naive height (the most basic and influential height function) to the lead and its corresponding section. Your understanding is correct!