Talk:Condition for Complex Root of Unity to be Primitive

I suggest to rename this article, in conformity with Complex Roots of Unity in Exponential Form. See also Talk:Complex Roots of Unity in Exponential Form. --barto (talk) 16:31, 3 December 2016 (EST)

What I did should work, yeah? --prime mover (talk) 16:54, 3 December 2016 (EST)

I'd add the word 'complex'. Also, it's more than a condition, it's really a characterization. I propose either Characterization of Primitive Complex Roots of Unity or Primitive Complex Roots of Unity in Exponential Form. In view of alphabetic ordering, the second seems better. --barto (talk) 17:02, 3 December 2016 (EST)

As a "primitive root of unity" is by definition already complex, it seemed superfluous to specify that the root under discussion is a complex one. The page lives in Complex Analysis, so it is implicit that the root is complex. Omitting the word "complex" from the title makes it shorter and less unwieldy.

Condition / Characterization -- there's a difference? The first is shorter, so again the preference for "condition".

As for alphabetic ordering, there has never been a criterion in $\mathsf{Pr} \infty \mathsf{fWiki}$ for such a consideration. Furthermore, "Primitive Complex Roots of Unity in Exponential Form" does not accurately describe what this page is stating, which is a condition which completely defines whether a particular $n$th root of unity is primitive or not. --prime mover (talk) 17:22, 3 December 2016 (EST)

Frther thought ... yes of course Definition:Primitive Complex Root of Unity is a different page to Definition:Primitive Root of Unity -- I concede the first point. --prime mover (talk) 17:24, 3 December 2016 (EST)