User talk:Maloney

Welcome to ProofWiki! Since you're new, you may want to check out the general help page. It's the best first stop to see how things are done (next to reading proofs, of course!). Please feel free to contribute to whichever area of mathematics interests you, either by adding new proofs, or fixing up existing ones. If you have any questions please feel free to contact one of the administrators, or post your question on the questions page.

Here are some useful pages to help get you started:
 * Community Portal - To see what needs to be done, and keep up to date with the community.
 * Recent Changes - To keep up with what's new, and what's being added.
 * Check out our house style if you are keen on contributing.
 * Main Page talk - This is where most of the main discussions regarding the direction of the site take place. If you have any ideas, please share them!

Cheers! prime mover (talk) 14:16, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Strongly Locally Compact Space is Locally Compact
I see you've edited this page because it wasn't true in its current phrasing. Two remarks:


 * 1) It is inappropriate to edit the theorem statement without the title reflecting this. Both should be changed simultaneously.
 * 2) It is inappropriate to change the notation to your own preference. See Definition:Closure (Topology)/Notation.

For now, I have put up a Template:Questionable. If you have ideas as to how to resolve this situation (which I currently don't), feel free to contribute on Definition talk:Locally Compact. Thanks for your anticipated cooperation. &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 22:53, 23 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I've changed the notation because it is more standard. Didn't mean to insult your taste of notational aesthetics. -- Maloney (talk) 11:11, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


 * No problem. We try to stick to a single notation so as to maintain coherence. (As usual, this doesn't always work out, but we can at least try, right?)


 * Also, please sign your contributions on talk pages (this can be done using four tildes or through clicking the "squiggly" button in the editing bar). See the FAQ for more information. &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 10:12, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

A bit of advice
Please do not just edit pages without clicking through to the definitions affected by your change. I say this because if you would've clicked through to Definition:Ring with Unity you would have seen that it is already specified to be non-null, so that the appropriate edit would have been to change the link to say "ring with unity" instead of merely "ring".

Similarly, you would have noted Definition:Proper Ideal as the right terminology for "ideal that is not the whole ring". Thanks :). &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 09:43, 25 May 2015 (UTC)