User talk:Topology Expert/Archive 3

Uniform product
A discussion of these spaces (in the context of point-set topology) seems worthwhile, but I'm not sure what would be the correct name for such an article. Have you seen this being called the uniform norm or uniform topology in a textbook or math paper? If I had my choice, I would call it uniform product. But it is not up to us to create terminology. Does this have a name in textbooks?

I don't think that WP is about maximizing details.

Oded (talk) 14:38, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Well done
I see you've been doing quite a bit of good work! I'm glad to see you have not been put off by earlier comments. It's all about having the right attitude: Wikipedians want to expand Wikipedia's coverage, not delete it into oblivion except for a few articles deemed the most significant. If you run into any problems, feel free to drop by my talk page. --C S (talk) 10:31, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I replied
on my own talk page. Oded (talk) 05:13, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:Spat
Hello Topology Expert,

Thanks a lot for pointing out, and correcting, my silly mistake on Topology/Local Connectedness. What happened was that I was simultaneously studying from and editing the Topology wikibook and hence I just moved that particular line (apparently placed there by a previous editor) from the text to the excercises. Later when I learned of the Topologist's sine curve etc. I modified the text appropriately, but forgot about the excercise.

Also, many thanks for adding the wonderful set of problems. I had created the exercises section in hope that someone would expand it. However, on wikibooks, it is not usual to link to any old word (in process creating a horde of red links!). Do take time to read Help:Wikibooks for Wikipedians

Happy editing!

Schrodu (talk) 11:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Featured articles and Top importance articles
There is slightly more to it than your opinion that the article is a featured article. See Featured_article_criteria: there are a number of objective criteria that the article has to meet before it can be listed as a featured article. The article currently flat out fails the requirement that it must give inline citations. (It fails the WP:V standard by not even listing a single reference.) Until this issue is addressed, the WP:FAC reviewers will not pass the article. If you wish to nominate the article for featured status, you are welcome to try. But don't be surprised when it is "speedily" rejected.

As for the Top importance label, that is a little bit more subjective, but I think you should try to use some common sense. The criterion is that the subject of the article must be crucial to its field, and extremely important beyond it. I personally don't feel that the concept of a locally connected space is all that important even within topology, let alone outside topology. If you like we can always solicit some further input from the Wikiproject mathematics. However, they are almost certain to agree that Locally connected space is not a top importance article. siℓℓy rabbit (  talk  ) 12:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd just like to further highlight the fact that featured article status can only be granted through the featured article candidate process. Basically what happens is experienced editors will make a list of things you need to do to bring the article into compliance with the featured article standards.  If you do those things, then the article will be reviewed and, if it passes, it will be "listed".  This has nothing to do with a little template at the top of the page, and putting FA class does not list the article as featured.  That requires a broader community consensus.  If you want to nominate the article for featured status, then the way you do that is not by messing around with the project template, but by adding the article to this list.  It will be reviewed, and feedback will be posted on the article talk page.   siℓℓy rabbit  (  talk  ) 13:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)