User talk:Wcherowi/Projective planes

Comments
It seems logical. It uses some of the text that was already in the article, which is nice (it gives other editors the impression that you valued their work and built off it). There will inevitably be small formatting/wording changes, that we can leave until later. I do have a few larger, substantive comments:

Definition: "theoretical considerations" is too vague. Omit it, I recommend. Let the Degenerate Planes section do the explaining.

Moulton plane: I don't quite understand it. It could be made clearer, along the lines of "the points are the same points as in the Euclidean plane; for each line in the Euclidean plane there is exactly one line in the Moulton plane; for the lines of positive slope, the incidence relations are as expected; for the lines of negative slope, the incidence relations are..."?

A finite example: Is this 1/. notation standard? The dots seem less good than 0s, or just leaving the squares blank.

Topological view of RP2: I would omit this; leave it to the Real projective plane article.

I have skimmed the rest. The parts that are done seem generally good, although I don't have expertise in many of them. Overall, the new material seems good. The article needs more references (but this is true of most Wikipedia math articles).

Thanks for undertaking this rewriting. I know that it's a lot of work. Keep going, please. :) Mgnbar (talk) 17:48, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Move?

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Removed by another editor. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:11, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

User:Wcherowi/Projective planes → Projective Plane –
 * Major reorganization, includes all aspects of older page, some rewritten, some expanded Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 02:58, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Projective Plane is a redirect only. The text is at Projective plane. History-split and then history-merge would be needed, as pages User:Wcherowi/Projective planes and Projective plane were edited simultaneously. This is a diff between the last surrent last edit of each: which is best? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:00, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Mea culpa. A slip of the shift key, it was supposed to be Projective plane. Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 02:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Camel-case should be avoided, so the article should be at Projective plane. In addition to the proposed new pagename, the new article is full of camel-case ("Some Examples"). This should be fixed. HandsomeFella (talk) 23:56, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 02:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Request Removed. Thank you for your contributions. Unfortunately, creating new articles is beyond the scope of the Requested moves process. Please submit your request to Articles for Creation. You can do so by adding to the top of the article. Feel free to contact me on my talk page with any questions. Happy editing. Cliff (talk) 20:53, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested Move 2

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. Withdrawn by nominator. Andrewa (talk) 00:38, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

User:Wcherowi/Projective planes → Projective plane – This is a major revision and reorganization of existing page Projective plane. It is not a new page as almost all of the old page remains but with new section titles and sections in different positions. Additional material has been added. The move will require history-split and history-merge. Previous request was erroneously removed. Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 04:34, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose. No, I'm afraid the two previous requests were correctly removed  but perhaps the reasons were not well presented. This is an article fork (see Content forking) and simply moving it over the current article presents a problem in preserving the previous edit history. Suggest you seek another review of this version, and then if it's favourable simply cut and paste your new version into the article. Andrewa (talk) 10:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Neutral. I don't understand the technical policy implications of what's going on here, but I'll say this: When you started working on this new version of Projective plane, I thought you would replace the content of the current article with your content &mdash; not try to use any official Wikipedia moving mechanism. I recommend that you post a comment at Talk:Projective plane asking people whether your new version is okay, and if no one objects after a while, then simply copy and paste into that article. Mgnbar (talk) 11:52, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Andrewa (talk) 13:53, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.