Definition talk:Extended Real Number Line

Propose rename because the extended reals don't even form a group, so calling them "numbers" seems a stretch. --Dfeuer (talk) 21:53, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


 * AFAIK this name is standard. I'm disinclined to change it - more so since I have grown used to it over the course of several years. --Lord_Farin (talk) 22:18, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm with L_F: I believe it's best to keep the standard names for things even though we think we can invent better ones. --prime mover (talk) 22:41, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Both names appear to be standard. --Dfeuer (talk) 22:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


 * How about a compromise: replace "extended real number space" with "extended real line"? --Dfeuer (talk) 22:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Why is it that you are so determined to change names? I grasp it if you have references (but even then an "AKA" section will suffice most of the time) but I don't get that impression generally. I'm genuinely curious; after all, renaming a concept usually mainly brings a lot of work. --Lord_Farin (talk) 23:02, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Since there are only two pages in the "Extended Real Number Space" category, that hardly seems like much work. In this case, I want to rename it because the name's too long and not as visually evocative as I'd like. --Dfeuer (talk) 23:04, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I am inclined to agree with you on that one. May I conclude that your reasons for proposing other renames are equally ad hoc in essence? --Lord_Farin (talk) 23:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I am against renaming pages on principle, unless there is a compelling reason to do so. The name is not too long and is as perfectly visually evocative as I'd like. I suspect that the desire to rename, restructure and rework every page possible is territorial. --prime mover (talk) 23:14, 23 January 2013 (UTC)