Talk:Distinct (mathematics)

This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page:
• Equality (mathematics)
Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at:
• Talk:Equality (mathematics)

This redirect was nominated at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion on 31 October 2020. The result of the discussion was keep.

Nonsense

An excellent example of why general purpose dictionaries should not be used to give definitions of mathematical terms. Distinctness in mathematics is not a numerical property. In geometry one refers to distinct points as ones which do not coincide. Maps with the same domain are distinct if they do not agree at some input. I could go on and on in this vein but I think my point is made. Mathematics is concerned with much more than just numerical properties and an all purpose term like this can not be restricted in this way. --Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 04:59, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Wcherowi: I removed the reference and put the old definition back. You made your point. However the information in the article might still be incorrect. Feel free to (go on and on and) improve the article with correct information. = ] --VeniVidiVicipedia (talk) 11:01, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 November 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 09:43, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Distinct (mathematics) → Distinct – The article was fine as a broad concept article where Distinction (philosophy) should be merged to until VeniVidiVicipedia decided to make the page specific to mathematics and moved the page without discussion. The article should be reverted to the previous title and the removal in Special:Diff/755835068 should be undone. GeoffreyT2000 ^{(talk, contribs)} 01:48, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose this is a very obscure use of "distinct" In ictu oculi (talk) 13:39, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per IIO, above. We don't do this with everyday words. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ< 20:14, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It's not true to say "we don't do this with everyday words", that all depends on what the encyclopedic topics linked to that word are. For example argument, back, bar, company, enclosure, nothing, truncate are all common dictionary words which nonetheless point to specific articles. However, in this case, I agree with IIO that this use of distinct is not primary over any of the others on the dab page. It also does not lead the page views for those entries.[1] — Amakuru (talk) 11:14, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.