2
$\begingroup$

This question of mine was based on an exercise posted in a blog. I asked an identification of the theorem it refers to. This theorem was identified in a comment to my question: it is stated and proved in another site, which I did not know.

Should my question on the main site be closed or deleted? I am not sure, but it may be better to do so.

In such a case I ask someone with the power for that to close/remove it.

Edit: In the 1st paragraph, "here" deleted [My question about theorem's name, etc. was posted in the main site, not here] .

In the 2nd paragraph, "safer" changed to "better". ["safer" was related with the concern I had about copyright: see my answer to KennyTM's comment below].

I hope this improves this question.

The tag "specific-question" has been added previously. A doubt of mine: Should specific questions be avoided here?

Update: quoting from above

Should my question on the main site be closed or deleted? I am not sure, but it may be better to do so. In such a case I ask someone with the power for that to close/remove it.

It is now my opinion that this concern of mine was unjustified.

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ How is it related to copyright? $\endgroup$ – kennytm Aug 12 '10 at 18:21
  • $\begingroup$ @KennyTM: Thanks for your comment which made me think again. I removed the copyright tag, because I have changed my mind and now think that the concern I had with the copyright was a silly one. $\endgroup$ – Américo Tavares Aug 12 '10 at 22:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ By specific-question, I meant that your meta question is about a specific question on the main site. That's perfectly fine, I just prefer to keep track of such things. $\endgroup$ – Larry Wang Aug 13 '10 at 13:18
  • $\begingroup$ @Kaestur: Oh, now I see. My doubt is cleared thanks to your reply. $\endgroup$ – Américo Tavares Aug 13 '10 at 15:48
  • $\begingroup$ There is a new meta question that is partially related to this one, in my view. meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/656/… $\endgroup$ – Américo Tavares Aug 14 '10 at 23:35
2
$\begingroup$

If the OP have resolved the problem, they could answer it themselves.

Of course, for this question I prefer Jorge to answer it. The actual answer doesn't need to be too detailed. Just the name "Butterfly theorem", the key geometrical theorems used there, and the link should be enough. (Something like this answer on SO; see this discussion on meta for detail about links.)

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Note that the SO question linked to asks only for the name, meaning that such a brief answer is complete. Américo's question does ask how to prove a theorem, and I believe a complete answer should address that. $\endgroup$ – Larry Wang Aug 12 '10 at 18:27
  • $\begingroup$ @Kaestur: But the last sentence of the question is " What is the theorem this exercise refers to? Or how does one prove it?". Of course a complete answer is much better. $\endgroup$ – kennytm Aug 12 '10 at 18:35
  • $\begingroup$ @Kaestur: not 'and' either ;) $\endgroup$ – kennytm Aug 12 '10 at 18:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @KennyTM: So we agree that name only is correct, name+proof is complete? $\endgroup$ – Larry Wang Aug 12 '10 at 18:58
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Kaestur: I agree. $\endgroup$ – kennytm Aug 12 '10 at 19:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @KennyTM, @Kaestur: My main interest when I asked this question in the main site was in the proof. I asked the theorem's name because knowing it I would try to search for a proof. I thought that it would also be fine for me if someone gives a proof, without indicating the name by which the theorem is known. $\endgroup$ – Américo Tavares Aug 12 '10 at 22:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .