 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
 | A member of the Guild of Copy Editors, Allens, reviewed a version of this article for copy editing on 9 March 2012. However, a major copy edit was inappropriate at that time because of the issues specified below, or the other tags now found on this article. Once these issues have been addressed, and any related tags have been cleared, please tag the article once again for {{copyedit}}. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English. Visit our project page if you are interested in joining! |
Split edit
Someone has re-instated the split tag without bothering to leave a comment on the talk page. I do not intend to spend my life trawling through the article history in the vain hope that an explanation has been given. If I understand the request correctly then it is without merit for the following reasons:
The content to split off is too small to make a viable article.
The content to split off may be subject to copyright.
The content to be split off is unreferenced.
The content to be split off is not notable.
If I were to carry out the split as requested then the split article is liable to be deleted for the above reasons and my time would be wasted.
When I next do the monthly cleanup of split tags (on or after the 1st of the next month), I intend to remove the relevant material. Having removed the relevant material the reason for the split tag will disappear and hence I intend to remove the split tag.
If you do not wish me to do this then there are 4 options that I am aware of:
1) Do the split yourself (if you disagree with my reasons not to split)
2) Rectify the problems stated above (and then preferably carry out the split)
3) Put a comment on THIS talk page informing us of when you plan to rectify the problem and then rectify the problem in that time scale.
4) Put a comment on this talk page explaining what you really wanted.
Op47 (talk) 10:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
- Might I ask exactly what material you're going to remove? The article is overly short as it is currently... Allens (talk | contribs) 18:47, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
- "In group theory, a multiplet is formally a group representation of an algebra.[citation needed]". As stated above, It is way to small to make a viable article of its own as the split tag has requested. I agree that the article is very small and a case could more properly be made for an expand tag rather than a split tag. Trust this helps Op47 (talk) 14:14, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation edit
There is a lot of confusion in this article due to competing scopes. There are currently two dominant ideas of "multiplet" in this article, multiplet (multilinear algebra) and multiplet (multiplicity) (for the multiple births and seismic activity). Both of those could easily become dabconcept pages containing the content here, and I feel that it would obviate the need for this article entirely, except possibly as a master disambiguation page. 75.139.254.117 (talk) 04:48, 14 January 2017 (UTC)