User talk:Topology Expert/Archive 9

Algebra template debate

I want to reply to your last response at the Math project talk page, but since it's just between us, I'll put it here. I didn't intend my response to be rude, but I did intend it to be direct, without politely (but circumspectly) avoiding expressing definite opinion. Lack of explicit politeness is certainly ruder, but I wasn't trying to insult you or to gratuitously trash your ideas; I merely did not want to leave any room for argument. Without implying that I was motivated by considerations of moral parity, I think it's important to realize that the manner in which you continued the discussion was itself at least inconsiderate: you set out some standards that no one else accepted (that the icon should be "real math" and by that you meant category theory, that only "real mathematicians" need understand it, that the template actually function as an instructive device) and then refused to meet on any middle ground concerning them, returning time and again to reiterating your original argument without having made any progress in convincing people to fully accept almost any of it. However I took this, it is of course no reason for me to be rude; I tailored my response to address the apparent fact that nothing short of a direct confrontation would actually deter you from continuing the cycle, fruitlessly.

In my opinion, the continued debate was a waste of all our time, but you should also understand that not everything was a waste of time. Your original goal, which was to replace the tacky square-root icon with a more serious one, was realized in a way not altogether dissimilar to the one you proposed. No, it won't inspire people to greater heights of learning, but it will give a little stir to the complacently stupid people who undervalue mathematics and be a satisfying token for the better-educated of us. I'm sorry that the debate proceeded as it did, and by that I don't mean that I regret resolving it as I did; but it is unfortunate that your idea wasn't received with enthusiasm, because it had merit and people recognized this. But it came with baggage, and that derailed the process. Ultimately, in Wikipedia the consensus is followed, and it is not rude or debatable to say that the discussion had become you versus everyone else. I did what I thought had to be done to prevent it from degenerating into a farce (and you could already see that happening, what with the "what has category theory done for us?" questions popping up and the tangential, rhetorical questions about the octonions). Ryan Reich (talk) 05:34, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thankyou

No problem. And I'm glad some common ground was found with respect to the stub image. Cheers, Ben (talk) 12:04, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, I just wanted to say, your "And I know that no one really would care if I retired" (on WPM) is not correct. I care. Knowledgeable people like you working on WP are always an asset, even if discussions sometimes get a bit weird/time-consuming/enerving/... I will review your article on Monday or Tuesday. Jakob.scholbach (talk) 14:03, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I guess I was a bit upset at the time.

Topology Expert (talk) 23:45, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Email

Hi, you certainly deserve an explanation, and I will give you one by email. It may take a while, though. Currently my 4-year-old daughter insists that I help her with her Lego. (Just let me correct one thing in public: Wikipedia has a couple of "famous" mathematics editors, but I am certainly not one of them by any reasonable standard.) --Hans Adler (talk) 14:48, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:Algebra-stub

This has now gone beyond ridiculous to being disruptive. There is no consensus at WT:WPM#Algebra stub template for your preferred image, despite you apparently several times accepting that and then restarting the discussion. This silly issue is distracting good editors from improving articles and I therefore have to warn you (again) that continuing with this tendentious editing will result in a block. I strongly suggest that you drop this issue now and refocus on the project. As for your edit summary "leave the administrative tasks to the field you know best", I won't even respond to that. –Moondyne 06:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I replied on your talk page. Anyway, other editors (as you can see above) have accepted the discussion to be closed. I contacted User:CBM and he will decide the correct image based on the votes. If someone disagrees with him, start another discussion.

Topology Expert (talk) 08:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

The solution is quite simple Topology Expert: stop changing the template image to your own preference. As to whether its blank or like this, I don't really care, but I do know that changes such as this have been discussed and rejected at WPM. My warning stands. –Moondyne 09:47, 22 November 2008 (UTC)