Template talk:Math topics sidebar

Right, can someone explain what business "meta" links such as the RecentChanges ones have being present on an article-space template? These are of no use to normal readers and fail what I think is the reasonable litmus test of making sense on a print version of Wikipedia. --Cybercobra (talk) 07:35, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I found a compromise. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mathematics#.22Recent_changes.22_links_removed_from_MathTopicTOC. Pcap ping 14:15, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects

The global change from "List" to "Index" is supported by the consensus of exactly 2 editors, without significant opposition (until possibly now). However, it should not have been done without consulting the WikiProject so that the bots could be rewritten, even if there were consensus for the move. I think the remaining problems are resolved by the compromise suggested by Pcap. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:28, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of recent edits

I reverted some recent edits for several reasons:

"discrete" without "mathematics" is meaningless here
For being useful, the list must be restricted to majors areas. So, adding new items requires a consensus here. Also, the link called "index" provides a lot of other areas
Some close areas have been grouped because they are so close that only specialists can distinguish them (calculus and analysis, logic and set theory, since Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory is the lofical base of all modern mathematics). It is confusing to split them.
The addeds item are either not important enough for being mentioned here, or are subareas of some other items (type theory is a part of logic, category theory is used everywhere in modern mathematics, but there are too many more important topice that are not listed, and should be if categorty theory would be added.

Every modification of this list of major areas requires a consensus on this talk page. D.Lazard (talk) 09:31, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]