Talk:Hitchin system

Definition of K

K is not defined... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.105.236.162 (talk) 05:16, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Its a field. 67.198.37.17 (talk) 02:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php/Hitchin_system. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Ozob (talk) 15:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Dear Ozob. The situation is not so simple. Until around 2006, this appendix has been not an appendix but this article itself. I had to write down notes as it is togather the other articles. However, in around 2008, I do not know what was the situation,　this article had been suddenly deleted and already moved to the site of Springer. After this, the article have been established from a new point of view. I welcome it. However, other articles, for example, generalized complex structure and ADHM construction, and so on, have lost consistency with this article. In order to be consistent I was recovered the old articles as an appendix. I apologize if I were wrong. Because I'm still anxious about the consistency with the other articles, I think again to try to recover it. This problem has been examined about the social responsibility of Wikipedia. I think it a difficult problem.--Enyokoyama (talk) 04:38, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

I was thinking summarizing one of the examples in Hitchin Segal Ward (as long as don't copy a phrase shouldn't run into this problem again). Also the ADHM article doesn't reference any of the structure. It just gives the recipe anyway. Unless that is something we want to change. AHusain (talk) 06:48, 4 January 2014 (UTC)