User talk:Lord Farin

Template for Gentzen proofs?
Since we have a template for non-Gentzen tableau proofs, it might be worth constructing one for the new Gentzen ones you're constructing at the moment. It should save some considerable effort and page space. What say? --prime mover (talk) 15:05, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't expect many proofs in this style, since even Ben-Ari tries to move on to different proof systems quickly. It is not a proof system that is very common or popular (other Gentzen systems are, however). I deem it wise to not create a template specifically for this proof style.


 * Nonetheless, given that we can expect more and more proof systems in the future, it might be a good idea to generalise Template:BeginTableau to arbitrary proof systems, and provide a generic template which can act as a semantic hull around the MediaWiki syntax, just like Template:Eqn and Template:Axiom do. This will make it easier to adapt to future needs. &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 17:36, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * More challenging ... I'm not immediately planning on doing all that much more in this area (I only raised it in the first place so as to have something to plant ZFC in back in 2008 and it all got a bit unwieldy) so for the moment I'll leave this until I have another manic episode. --prime mover (talk) 19:28, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Source Reviews
I have refactored Definition:Gamma Function and there is a resulting SourceReview to attend to -- enjoy! --prime mover (talk) 11:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Lovely, thanks! Dealt with. &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 11:41, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Another two for you: Definition:Convex Real Function and Definition:Concave Real Function: some much overdue refactoring done; further work in progress (including an effective way to handle the strict case). --prime mover (talk) 07:05, 26 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Thxdone. &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 13:42, 26 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I've done the Strictly versions (as initially raised by Abcxyz) so if they have been defined in Schilling feel free to take care of that -- otherwise just delete the source citations. --prime mover (talk) 16:31, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Boolean Algebra
I have been investigating the "Wanted Pages" list and clearing out dead links to superseded pages. One such is Category:Boolean Algebra, where there is still a link from the Definition:Algebra page. Is it appropriate to replace this with Definition:Boolean Algebra in your opinion, or to remove it from that particular list in which it appears? --prime mover (talk) 08:23, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
 * ... or indeed replace with Category:Boolean Algebras? --prime mover (talk) 08:27, 2 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I think it'd be best to remove it. A link to Definition:Boolean Algebra could be added to the "Algebra (Abstract Algebra)" subpage. &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 21:11, 2 May 2014 (UTC)