User talk:Dtrebbien
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives: 1(– 2008 May 5)
Contents |
[edit] Images at Wikimedia Commons deleted
Hello. I have deleted commons:Image:3 obscure mealybugs.jpg & commons:image:Obscure mealybug.jpg because images licensed the by-nc licences are unfree for commercial use. --Benn Newman (talk) 02:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] William Miles Maskell
--Elkman (Elkspeak) 15:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks!
Thanks so much for your support in myRfA, which closed successfully this morning. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 19:16, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Nilpotent group
I think a straightforward induction argument would be good in the nilpotent group article. The one in p-group is (supposed to be) so brief, that it is easy to miss something. It wouldn't hurt to have a longer proof in the nilpotent groups article. Then one could have a footnote in the p-group proof to point to the longer proof in nilpotent group.
At some point a few editors (I, NBarth, and someone else working on the central series style articles) were even considering having a whole article on the normalizer condition. I think there would be no problems making a version for nilpotent group. The only difference is that instead of inducting on the group order, you have to induct on the nilpotency class (since the group could be infinite). It is always nice to see finite group ideas applied for infinite groups, so this would be a doubly nice thing to have.
BTW if you are interested in group theory, that article is undergoing major work right now. We just finished getting group (mathematics) to GA status, and now the plan is group theory. There is a whole group of editors at WT:MATH / WP:WikiProject Mathematics too. JackSchmidt (talk) 21:38, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- PS Thanks for {{JFM}}! I glanced through your past user talk to make sure I wasn't repeating invitations to WP math and the group theory collaborations, and noticed you had created those templates. The Zbl and JFM reviews are often quite good, and often quite different, so I think it is an incredibly good idea to have both in the bibliographies, and your template has made this much easier. JackSchmidt (talk) 21:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- Hi Jack. Thanks for the invitation. I will take a look. « D. Trebbien (talk) 19:50 2008 May 27 (UTC)