Timeline for Requests for Reopen & Undeletion Votes (volume 01/2022 - today)
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 20, 2022 at 13:00 | comment | added | ryang | Have looked through all 4 suggested links: the 5 posts collectively are at best cousins. Distilling such Questions into a bigass FAQ is as reasonable/realistic and fair as doing likewise for Questions related to parabolic curves. | |
| Jul 20, 2022 at 12:53 | history | edited | ryang | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 121 characters in body
|
| Jul 20, 2022 at 12:46 | history | edited | ryang | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 83 characters in body
|
| Jul 20, 2022 at 8:41 | history | edited | ryang | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Jul 20, 2022 at 6:00 | history | edited | ryang | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 70 characters in body
|
| Jul 20, 2022 at 4:43 | history | edited | ryang | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 31 characters in body
|
| Jul 20, 2022 at 3:13 | comment | added | Xander Henderson Mod | There are other related questions: math.stackexchange.com/q/1593297, math.stackexchange.com/q/4207093, math.stackexchange.com/q/4308984. There are probably others. This seems like a good candidate for a nicely written FAQ post. | |
| Jul 20, 2022 at 2:58 | comment | added | Xander Henderson Mod | @ryang I very much appreciate you mathsplaining to me what it is that I misunderstand. However, I see both questions as fundamentally being about what quantifiers mean. Neither is a very good question (in my opinion), but an answer to one could easily be an answer to the other with very little editing. For example, you could make some very small edits to your answer and post it to the older question. The goal of the site is to create a repository of question and answers---lumping together closely related questions improves the overall quality of that respository. | |
| Jul 20, 2022 at 2:56 | comment | added | Xander Henderson Mod | @GerryMyerson I don't disagree, but the question is currently deleted. It seems like a waste of time to undelete it, reopen it, close it as a duplicate, and then delete it again. | |
| Jul 20, 2022 at 2:53 | comment | added | ryang | Your misunderstanding was due to the latter's inaccurate title and irrelevant cursory side-mention of For Some, and the former's similar irrelevant cursory side-mention of For All & Any. (Yes, neither author is a particularly good writer, and I've just edited the latter, for clarity.) $\quad$ Also, note that the two post's Answers do not at all cross-address each other's Questions. $\quad$ (ping @GerryMyerson for reference) | |
| Jul 20, 2022 at 2:52 | comment | added | ryang | @XanderHenderson My undelete request's thesis question is regarding the confusion over multiple interpretations of For Some, whereas your linked question is asking about the difference between For All and For Any, so both questions (each is a good FAQ) in fact cleanly complement each other. | |
| Jul 20, 2022 at 1:15 | comment | added | user1046533 | "A newcomer, unschooled in mathematical vocabulary and arguments ... " Obviously, this "context" you mentioned is either being ignored or regarded as useless by the second comment above. | |
| Jul 19, 2022 at 23:00 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | If it's a duplicate, I'd suggest it should be closed (and deleted) as a duplicate, rather than with the notice "This question needs details or clarity." | |
| Jul 19, 2022 at 20:38 | comment | added | Xander Henderson Mod | This seems to be a duplicate of a more general question. "Reasonable" and "natural" are not, in-and-of-themselves, sufficient reasons to retain a question. "Novel" is also required. | |
| Jul 19, 2022 at 19:32 | history | answered | ryang | CC BY-SA 4.0 |