Talk:Non-Borel set: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Milton Beychok
imported>Peter Schmitt
(→‎Some remarks: new section)
Line 11: Line 11:


Other than that, you seem to have learned the CZ style quite well. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 23:55, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Other than that, you seem to have learned the CZ style quite well. [[User:Milton Beychok|Milton Beychok]] 23:55, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
== Some remarks ==
I think it would be better to merge this with [[Borel set]] (which is not more than a stub).
An article about Borel sets should also tell about non-Borel sets.
In my opinion (I do not know if this is a general opinion) this article does not need a link to "simple" topics like divisor, etc. It necessarily addresses readers who should know this.
The "Advanced" subpage only contains one sentence and a reference -- that could/should be moved to the article.
[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 00:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:11, 20 June 2009

This article is developing and not approved.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Advanced [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition:  A constructive example of a set of real numbers that is not a Borel set. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category:  mathematics [Please add or review categories]
 Talk Archive:  none  English language variant:  American English
Fountain pen.png
 NOTICE, please do not remove from top of page.
WP article "Non-Borel set", version of 23 Aug 2008, was used. I am its sole author.
Boris Tsirelson

Suggestion: Create "Related Articles" subpage

Hi, Boris. The only suggestion I have is that you should create the "Related Articles" subpage:

  • When you click on the "Related Articles" tab just above, you will see the instructions on how to do it.

Other than that, you seem to have learned the CZ style quite well. Milton Beychok 23:55, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Some remarks

I think it would be better to merge this with Borel set (which is not more than a stub). An article about Borel sets should also tell about non-Borel sets.

In my opinion (I do not know if this is a general opinion) this article does not need a link to "simple" topics like divisor, etc. It necessarily addresses readers who should know this.

The "Advanced" subpage only contains one sentence and a reference -- that could/should be moved to the article.

Peter Schmitt 00:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Non-Borel_set&oldid=628959"