Talk:Equivalence of Definitions of Piecewise Continuously Differentiable Function

At first I did not understand what house rule you are thinking of, Prime.mover, but I guess you find the name too long. Anyway, since Definition 1 now has been moved to a separate page, the name is misleading. I suggest to rename the page from "Piecewise Continuously Differentiable Function/Definition 2 is Equivalent to Piecewise Continuously Differentiable Function" to "Piecewise Continuously Differentiable Function/Definition 2 is Equivalent to Definition 1". --Ivar Sand (talk) 08:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes I need to get round to tidying all this up but I have my hands full doing something else at the moment. In the meantime, please do not remove maintenance templates like "refactor" and such like, there is still work to do here and I want a flag kept up so that I don't forget. --prime mover (talk) 17:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Further refactoring
Please refer to the talk page Definition talk:Piecewise Continuously Differentiable Function for a discussion on the definition of the concept under discussion. --prime mover (talk) 04:42, 22 March 2018 (EDT)

Tidy
I think that all tidying has been done know, and I would like to remove the tidy template. However, I am never quite sure if everything is finished, so, if not, could somebody please tell me what exactly remains to be done? --Ivar Sand (talk) 04:32, 13 December 2018 (EST)


 * Minor stuff, which I have attended to. Job done. --prime mover (talk) 05:29, 13 December 2018 (EST)


 * Thanks, prime mover. Only minor stuff, yes, but a lot of it in my opinion. I am sorry that I am still unable to tidy a page completely in spite of having been active on this site a few years. But maybe next time! --Ivar Sand (talk) 05:00, 17 December 2018 (EST)


 * It does not matter. Just because you entered the material, that does not make it your responsibility to maintain it. --prime mover (talk) 12:22, 17 December 2018 (EST)