Skip to main content
20 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 13, 2017 at 12:58 history edited CommunityBot
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
Apr 13, 2017 at 12:21 history edited CommunityBot
replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/
Oct 30, 2013 at 6:01 vote accept Martin Sleziak
Aug 6, 2012 at 20:50 comment added Michael Hardy Very few questions on stackexchange state a motivation for askin the question. Generally people don't want to know.
Oct 12, 2011 at 11:23 history edited Martin Sleziak CC BY-SA 3.0
added 188 characters in body
Sep 2, 2011 at 1:56 comment added Srivatsan Has there been any question posted on this site with improving a wikipedia article as the main motivation?
Aug 15, 2011 at 10:49 answer added Pete L. Clark timeline score: 20
Aug 13, 2011 at 17:15 comment added Hendrik Vogt @J.M.: Yes, agreed, that's not a bad strategy.
Aug 13, 2011 at 15:59 comment added J. M. ain't a mathematician I know @Hendrik, but it's always safe to have the initial assumption that you're the one misunderstanding...
Aug 13, 2011 at 15:46 comment added Hendrik Vogt @J.M.: But it is also true that there are quite a few bad mistakes on wikipedia; it really isn't a reliable source for math yet.
Aug 13, 2011 at 15:38 comment added Bill Dubuque @J.M. My comment refers to your remark about "too many" questions about Wikipedia articles. There can be no such thing since the source plays no role. Perhaps there can be too many questions posted by a user during some time frame, but that has nothing to do with the source.
Aug 13, 2011 at 15:35 comment added J. M. ain't a mathematician ... that's what I said, @Bill. "only the mathematical portion really matters for the purposes of this site" and all that...
Aug 13, 2011 at 15:31 comment added Bill Dubuque @J.M. The source of a question plays no role in its topicality here - only the mathematics.
Aug 13, 2011 at 14:59 comment added J. M. ain't a mathematician I did say "not necessarily". But I would say "improving my understanding" is slightly better motivation than "editing a wiki-page"...
Aug 13, 2011 at 14:56 comment added Martin Sleziak @J. M. so you don't necessarily need to tip your hand that your endgame is editing the wiki-page It would feel a little like cheating to me, if I were hiding the reasons for asking. Moreover, quite often people ask about motivation for questions, although usually it is when a question is poorly stated.
Aug 13, 2011 at 14:42 comment added J. M. ain't a mathematician Otherwise, only the mathematical portion really matters for the purposes of this site, so you don't necessarily need to tip your hand that your endgame is editing the wiki-page...
Aug 13, 2011 at 14:41 comment added J. M. ain't a mathematician The key word in @Theo's comment is "too many"; I would suppose a few questions of the form "I saw claim x on Wikipedia, but it seems dodgy because of blablabla... am I misunderstanding something?" Note that particular formulation; I would say that even with the free-for-all editing nature of the beast, the likelihood that you're the one misunderstanding is often higher.
Aug 13, 2011 at 13:48 history edited Martin Sleziak CC BY-SA 3.0
added 88 characters in body
Aug 13, 2011 at 13:47 comment added t.b. What I don't understand is: What does Wikipedia really have to do with this? I mean the motivation of many questions here is often a bit unclear, so I'd say what counts is whether the question is of (at least marginal) mathematical interest. I would be opposed to too many questions asking to "referee" Wikipedia articles or providing sources, but as long as there is something that is on-topic on this site I don't really care if a claim on Wikipedia or a homework sheet is the reason for asking.
Aug 13, 2011 at 13:29 history asked Martin Sleziak CC BY-SA 3.0