Talk:Quotient Ring is an Ideal

I wouldn't want to delete this page - but rather than go through all the stages of the proof on this page, it needs to link to the various stages on the way towards the proof. --prime mover 17:19, 20 April 2012 (EDT)
 * But what part of the page merits its existence, given the two referenced pages? Even the epi is just an instance of the canonical quotient epi. --Lord_Farin 18:09, 20 April 2012 (EDT)
 * Now I think about it, even the page title is inaccurate. It's not the "quotient ring" which is the "ideal", it's the equivalence class of the ring zero which is the ideal. So yes, this page is ultimately a bit rubbish. But as I say, please leave it up for a while as I have things I need to ponder in order to establish exactly how to present a thread of thought. Sorry but I'm only able to bend part of my brain to this for the moment and I have a part-completed train of thought that I don't want to completely lose. --prime mover 04:26, 21 April 2012 (EDT)
 * No problem with delaying deletion, of course. It has to be made sure that everything is covered elsewhere before such drastic measures are taken. --Lord_Farin 04:27, 21 April 2012 (EDT)

What's the status on this? Can it be deleted? &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 22:21, 29 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Not yet, I want to go back over it. --prime mover (talk) 05:13, 30 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Just found this again. What is our verdict? &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 14:08, 11 May 2018 (EDT)


 * Ah, let's delete it. I'm about to take a deep breath before I embark on some more tunnelling through books again, I may revisit some of the AbAlg work and see whether it hangs together more coherently than it used to. If there's a need to clarify the existential status of quotient rings being ideals, this will come to light during that. --prime mover (talk) 14:39, 11 May 2018 (EDT)