Knowledge

:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 March 31 - Knowledge

Source đź“ť

1231:(in the modern sense) is someone who pursues some activity, but not professionally. A child practicing arithmetic cannot be called an amateur mathematician unless she is pursuing it voluntarily. A grocery store cashier cannot be called an amateur mathematician unless he pursues mathematics outside the scope of his job. Vi Hart, on the other hand, has been paid by Khan in part for her expertise in mathematics (do you think she would be able to make those videos if she were clueless about math?) and so she is (or has been) a professional mathematician. It might be appropriate to distinguish her from research mathematicians, since she doesn't seem to have done much research in the past and does not seem to be currently engaged in it. But "mathematician" does not mean "research mathematician" (no matter what some of my colleagues think). 1508:, not all people who have added a few numbers get to be called mathematicians. The existing recreational category should be used for Vi Hart as she's described by a number of reliable sources in that way, or sometimes they cite her self-description and don't bother to quibble with it (meaning they more or less agree). Vi Hart certainly is a professional, for one having published cited papers, but two even ignoring khan academy her YouTube videos have garnered millions of views which translates into significant ad revenue for her - she is exploring mathematics and educating the next generation and being paid for it so it's silly to try to exclude her as a mathematician, I sense a distinct tinge of jealousy in all this.-- 1551:
amateur? I doubt we could get agreement on that. We usually think of L'Hopital as an amateur, but he got paid royalties for his Calculus book, so would that make him a professional? Most of George Boole's important research work was done as an amateur, but he was then appointed to a professor of mathematics at Queen's College, Cork (Ireland), and published more, so was he an amateur or a professional? And look at the fight here as to whether working at Khan Academy "counts". Creating such a category would do little to help inform readers, and would lead to too many edit wars.
1595:-- Maths is an unusual discipline, in that in the past those pursuing other professions were able to make significant contributions to the subject. I would want to exclude actuaries, statisticians and mathematics teachers from the cateogry, because they are in mathematical professions. I believe it is known for Ph.D.s in Mathematics to be awarded on the basis of a dissertion of a few pages, rather than the typcial 40,000 words in sciences and 80,000 in the arts. 1359:. It's often easy to determine whether someone is *not* an amateur (i.e. they have done something that would almost certainly have caused them to be paid for their mathematical work, such as being a teacher of mathematics, a professional researcher, or an author of mathematics books). It is much harder to prove a negative: how do you show that someone has not been paid for their work? A case in point: 1504:
amateur and pro is too fuzzy and should be left to a list, we have oodles of things that are appropriate for a list but completely not for a category. Mathematics is not a field with licensing requirements or under the oversight of professional bodies or government agencies, it's wonderful because anyone can do mathematics. However, in the same way that all actors who once waited tables are not
1447:. It is absolutely clear to me that an "amateur" can be an "expert" in their field. I'd also like to point out the temporal nature of the amateur status. Whatever the criteria are, an amateur one day could pass some threshold and lose that status the next day. It is only the lack of notability which keeps us from having to categorize all graduate math students as amateurs. 1363:(primarily a dentist) was until recently listed in this category. He was also for many years an editor for a mathematics journal. Some journal editors are paid for their work, others do it on a volunteer basis. How do we know whether he was a paid or unpaid editor? And how much pay would be needed to push him from the amateur to non-amateur class? For another example, 1391:, a famous composer of music. He was always a professional in just one field — insurance — and many other professionals in his field had no clue that he was at all musical. This category can embrace mathematicians comparable to Ives (Bankoff sounds rather comparable), as well as gentleman mathematicians such as l'Hopital. 925:. I agree with the nominator's statement and would add that, despite the apparent purpose of the new category being to hide Vi Hart somewhere away from the other mathematicians, it does not fit her. She is not an amateur as she has earned a living (paid by the Khan Academy among others) for her mathematical work. — 1573:
paid for his work? Maybe his main job was scribe, and he did his math at night on sheets of papyrus. A list is a much better solution here, where we can source and detail the extent of their work and have some more specific criteria for inclusion (and even say "Yes, Joe was paid once for a paper, but
1098:
any women find it difficult to be accepted by the mathematics community if they are not seen as professional. While the label "amateur" mathematician may have been an honorable one when women were not expected to do anything other than domestic work, it is no longer a label that would meet with such
982:
I am merely sorting out the categories so as to address your complaints. I do not nominate new content for deletion, nor do I ask other users to stop editing, simply because I am unhappy with the wording. No damage is being done; if anything, I am improving the articles so as to make the terminology
1503:
we don't feel a need to create 'amateur' chefs or 'amateur' biologists, and I don't see a need to try to create a new subcategory here - if the reliable sources regularly describe the person as a mathematician they are in, no need to pass go no need to collect 200. As JPL states the border between
142:
not only does it violate last rung rule (and parent cat too small to be worth splitting by nationality) developmental biology specifically is a field that has had significant participation by women since the early days and much successful research, the only article I found on this subject outlined
1207:
people like Martin Gardner (who was what might be called a "professional recreational mathematician"). But an any rate, the lack of agreement among editors here certainly suggests that this material is best handled in list form, rather than category form, where the dubbing of a mathematician as
1179:
be somewhat woolly, most cases should be clear-cut, and even those that aren't can be properly discussed and referenced on the corresponding articles. Failing this, the wording of the definition could be tightened or loosened as necessary to better reflect usage in reliable sources. Unless and
1550:
gives a fairly clear description of what they mean by that term; we cannot. For example, if someone's career was in a field of math other than research mathematics (e.g. actuary, statistician, or community college teacher), but they proved an important theorem, would they be a professional or
951:. Mathematicians are by definition experts in their field, and NOT amateurs. Furthermore, Vi Hart is not professional mathematician. She is a professional entertainer (via YouTube) and arguably a professional educator (via Khan Academy) but absolutely NOT a professional mathematician. 1327:
characteristic: "one that reliable sources commonly and consistently define the subject as having". I'm not sure about the commonly as until today I did not know several of those mentioned were amateurs. Outside of sports and ham radio I've found only one equivalent category
1199:. Something that seems to be unclear to me from the above discussion is the exact meaning of "amateur". I would think this means someone who is not a professional: that is, someone who is not compensated monetarily for their mathematical work. Presumably this would 1124:. And leave as a subcategory of mathematicians. Amateur does not mean they are not mathematicians. They can be very good ones just that it isn't a major job they do. There are a lot of mathematicians and they need subcategorization, I think this is a good subcategory. 1367:
did much of his academic work unpaid, but eventually became a professor: do we define an amateur to be someone who once did unpaid mathematics (in which case, does everyone who published research as an undergraduate qualify?) or someone who has never been paid as a
873:
Your proposed definition doesn't match how the term "amateur" is used in reliable sources. If you want to come up with your own definitions, that's fine, and there are several peer-reviewed journals that will publish your musings. But it's not appropriate here.
1694:). The "amateur" label does not appear to have been applied to mathematicians of antiquity, and the terms seems to have fallen out of use, at least in describing 20th C. mathematicians. If this category is kept, we can populated it easily enough using 1272:. It's quite easy to ascertain whether a specific mathematician is a professional (i.e. being compensated for mathematical work) or an amateur (i.e. not being compensated for mathematical work). Let's use this category for the mathematical variants of 1169:
or otherwise disruptive behaviour is similarly irrelevant. Disruptive editing should be dealt with by warnings and discussions in the first instances, and topic bans, blocks, or other administrative remedies in the last. Again, nothing to do with
1386:
Good point, but the problem can be resolved by changing my criteria. We can put people here who are (1) known for mathematical work, and (2) never engaged in mathematics as a career. For a good example (not mathematics, but similar), see
1612:
what is the meaningful distinction between whether one is formally paid for one's mathematical doings? And how does one handle the ancients? Was Pythagoras professional or amateur? What sources show whether or not he was remunerated?
472:: the correct form is either "enclaves in KY" (for pieces of other states surrounded by KY) or "exclaves of KY" (for pieces of KY surrounded by other states). No enclaves are located in Kentucky, and the only Kentucky exclave is the 521:
No reason for this limited to one article category, at least unless there are major boundary changes of Kentucky. If that happens, we can reconsider the issue, but as long as Kentucky keeps its current boundaries we should just
1084:. Catagorizing an article does not receive the same level of scrutiny as a controversial claim in the article proper, and claiming "amateur" status for contemporary women mathematicians is likely to be controversial. From 1000:
thinks they are improving articles. The trick is convincing other people that you're correct. I'd recommend you back off a bit from editing and spend a bit more time establishing support for the changes you want to make.
1481:
as an appropriate aid to navigation for a defining characteristic. Those individuals who are defined as mathematicians who have done their work on a non-professional basis should be categorized on that basis, as we do for
1422:— on the grounds that an amateur mathematician is a particular class of mathematician, namely one who is not paid as such. I do not support the opinion that "amateur" means "non-expert", or that it is disjoint from 742:
so the the category is not "virtually empty." Morever, L'Hospital is not an amateur. His work is referenced by every math teacher, student, and researcher today. Everyone considers him an expert in his theorems.
1104:
If we can source a claim for mathematical "amateur" status then (assuming notability and other guidelines are met) we have a perfectly good list article where that can be recorded. Let's leave it at that.
1155:
Whether or not the term "amateur" is controversial, offensive, or dismissive is irrelevant. What matters is whether the mathematicians in question are commonly described as such in reliable sources.
1630:
There is no useful distinction between professional and amateur mathematicians, and there is no encyclopedic benefit from opening arguments concerning an inconsequential category on multiple pages.
1527:
Mathematics is a field where someone can be recognized for contributions in the field without being compensated for it. This is true in a a way that you wouldn't find in a field like Architecture.
840: 119:
This violates the rule against creating last-rung ERGS categories, because we have no full diffusion of this category. I also doubt we could create a referenced, non-list article on
1208:
amateur can at least be attributed to some source other than the whims of editorial discretion. Presumably there are potential BLP issues involved in this categorization as well.
1162:
can be properly placed in this category). The proper list/category placement of any one individual is a content dispute, not an argument for keeping or deleting an entire category.
913:
would rather change the definition of mathematician to "anyone who does math" so that first-graders, cashiers, homeowners, and anyone with a 401K can be considered mathematicians.
1149: 37: 42: 500: 1249:
She is currently engaged in "research", to the extent that this means publications in mathematics journals. She has solo publications in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, and 2013.
1698:. The difficulty will arise (as it has arisen here) when we want to classify mathematicians who worked outside of (roughly) 1400–1900. If the category was narrowed to 1464:
In very few cases do we distinguish if someone is "professional" or "amateur". Only when the line is very firm and very clear do we do so. This is not the case here.
1099:
acceptance. Such a designation would now have negative connotations, and would make it difficult, for example, to receive grants, awards, jobs, and recognition.
803:"John Bernoulli's bitterness increased when a French nobleman and amateur mathematician, the Marquis de L'Hospital (1661-1704) published under his own name..." 504: 143:
all of the potential causes for this. I don't think this has been a subject of significant study and I don't see value in having a genderized category here.--
1668:
A mathematician is a person with an extensive knowledge of mathematics who uses this knowledge in their work, typically to solve mathematical problems.
1048:
is an amateur or expert mathematician. I want to develop criteria by which we can judge someone to be an expert. But nobody has addressed this so far.
21: 1638:
mathematician a defining characteristic of Gardener? As mentioned above, what reliable source will be used to determine the primary vocation of
837:"As for science, we note that we need not go very far back in history to find successful amateurs, such as L'Hospital, Schliemann, or Galois." 1699: 964:
from other categories as well as adding them here. Undoing this damage will require more than simply automatically upmerging this category. —
761:"Guillaume François Antoine Marquis de L'Hospital, amateur mathematician, borth in 1661 in Paris, died February 2, 1704, in Paris, France." 539:-- because there is and will only ever be one article. I might have wanted to merge to a US category, but gather that this is unnecessary. 1634:
was presumably paid for his columns and books and no benefit will arise from deciding whether that was his "primary vocation". Was being an
661: 168:
has not been "established as academically or culturally significant by external sources", at least not separate from the broader topic of
313:
is preferable to using "of Foo". "Of" denotes formal belonging, which is inaccurate in this case, whereas the former indicate identity (
17: 1044:
I don't mean it to be pejorative. I agree with you that "amateur" means unpaid and non-expert. The root cause of this issue is whether
302: 1692: 815: 794: 773: 1691:
a useful distinction between amateur and non-amateur mathematicians in the literature (e.g., "The Mathematics of Great Amateurs"
901:
has existed since 2004 and there's no reason not to have a category for these articles. Moreover, It is not appropriate to have
1647: 1337: 707: 652: 1711: 1569:
Exactly. How much payment does one have to get for mathematics before one becomes a so-called professional? For example, was
1308: 1110: 1066: 1006: 944: 902: 898: 879: 739: 715: 711: 105: 1703: 1215: 291: 1026:– this seems very pointy as Jay Gatsby is using 'amateur' in a pejorative sense. 'Amateur' means unpaid, not non-expert. 1483: 1329: 435: 1574:
most of his important work was done while he was waiting tables"), but a category that is binary in/out doesn't work.--
669: 641: 1715: 1679: 1622: 1604: 1583: 1560: 1536: 1517: 1495: 1473: 1456: 1435: 1400: 1377: 1349: 1312: 1293: 1258: 1240: 1219: 1189: 1133: 1114: 1070: 1052: 1035: 1010: 987: 973: 955: 934: 917: 883: 747: 731: 636: 565: 548: 531: 513: 485: 417: 350: 331: 279: 212: 195: 178: 152: 132: 120: 97: 1277: 443: 426: 782:"The Marquis de L'Hospital was an amateur mathematician who had become deeply interested in the new calculus...." 1735: 1707: 1505: 1469: 1304: 1180:
until these options have been explored I don't see that it's necessary to leap to deleting the entire category. —
1106: 1062: 1002: 875: 632: 613: 585: 527: 398: 370: 287: 260: 232: 128: 109: 78: 1209: 1618: 1373: 1158:
The issue of where to categorize Vi Hart and L'Hopital is irrelevant (unless it can be shown that neither they
969: 930: 561: 208: 123:. We don't have to upmerge to the Developmental biologists category, because the one article is already there. 1659: 1600: 1423: 1419: 703: 544: 191: 1148:
That there already exists a list on this topic is not a reason to delete this category. See our guideline
1579: 1513: 948: 906: 148: 1731: 1431: 609: 581: 394: 366: 346: 256: 228: 74: 1465: 1345: 1185: 727: 628: 523: 124: 1614: 1418:
I would support keeping the category but strictly on the understanding that it is a subcategory of
1369: 1273: 965: 926: 910: 557: 469: 414: 276: 204: 94: 1675: 1596: 1491: 1452: 1324: 851: 540: 187: 1730:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
1575: 1556: 1547: 1509: 1396: 1364: 1333: 1289: 1254: 960:
PS The category's creator, Jay Gatsby, is now removing other prominent mathematicians such as
812: 791: 770: 580:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
509: 481: 365:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
327: 227:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
174: 144: 608:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
393:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
255:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
73:
Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's
1532: 1444: 1427: 342: 1631: 1341: 1181: 1166: 1049: 1031: 984: 952: 914: 864: 744: 723: 695: 826: 1236: 1129: 961: 909:. Mathematicians are by definition experts in their field, and therefore NOT amateurs. 161: 1671: 1663: 1487: 1448: 1061:
Whether or not a term is seen as pejorative has very little to do with your intent.
473: 1695: 1552: 1392: 1388: 1360: 1285: 1250: 699: 499:, that is not part of an established series. The article is already categorized in 496: 477: 1323:
we are closer to potential category. One question is whether this can be called a
1667: 1651: 1227:, but remove Vi Hart and add Fermat, Boole, Pascal, Kronecker, Heegner, etc. An 1528: 1281: 1089: 806: 764: 1643: 1027: 719: 476:. We have no need for a category that can't contain more than one article. 1232: 1125: 785: 602:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
387:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
249:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
67:
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories.
1336:
and could be regarded as field in its own right, perhaps more akin to our
1228: 1175:
I think that, though the classification of mathematicians as "amateurs"
1045: 160:. As noted above, this category fails virtually every threshold set by 1639: 1570: 738:
I am in the process of categorizing the appropriate articles from
790:. Vol. 47. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. p. 435. 1141:. To address some of the objections others have raised so far: 1546:
for all the reasons Obi-Wan Kenobi describes. The article on
1724:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
1700:
Category:Great Western Amateur Mathematicians (1400-1900)
574:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
359:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
221:
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion.
677: 673: 665: 657: 451: 447: 439: 431: 1652:
primary vocation did not involve mathematics (or any
1150:
Knowledge:Categories, lists, and navigation templates
1738:). No further edits should be made to this section. 616:). No further edits should be made to this section. 588:). No further edits should be made to this section. 501:
Category:Border irregularities of the United States
401:). No further edits should be made to this section. 373:). No further edits should be made to this section. 263:). No further edits should be made to this section. 235:). No further edits should be made to this section. 81:). No further edits should be made to this section. 1086:Women in Mathematics: The Addition of Difference 323:(Category creator not notified because: inactive) 1702:, I think membership would be uncontroversial. 164:. Most importantly, in my opinion, the topic of 301:Either of the two primary conventions found in 1165:Whether the category's creator is engaging in 1203:people like L'Hopital (who was not paid) and 505:Category:Geography of Fulton County, Kentucky 8: 1443:. Basically I am in complete agreement with 497:small category, with no potential for growth 787:The Secondary School Mathematics Curriculum 718:. Potentially awkward as many of the great 700:Talk:Vi Hart#Vi Hart is NOT a mathematician 698:category created following a discussion at 714:, virtually empty. It also mirrors a list 1338:Category:Recreational mathematics experts 708:Category:Recreational mathematics experts 507:, and so there is no need to upmerge. -- 756:L'Hospital is considered to be amateur. 106:Category:Women developmental biologists 60:Category:Women developmental biologists 1704:Category:Recent Amateur Mathematicians 860: 849: 186:-- another unnecessary sexual split. 1706:would have nothing but controversy. 7: 1303:Arrrgghhhh.... I knew that once.... 1646:? Compare the unclear criterion at 18:Knowledge:Categories for discussion 303:Category:Indian musicians by state 28: 831:The Mathematics of Great Amateurs 623:The result of the discussion was: 408:The result of the discussion was: 270:The result of the discussion was: 88:The result of the discussion was: 996:Well, yes, a few vandals aside, 825:Collidge, Julian Lowell (1949). 1648:Category:Amateur mathematicians 1284:, yes, let's put him in here. 808:Burton's history of mathematics 712:Category:Mathematics educators‎ 653:Category:Amateur mathematicians 595:Category:Amateur mathematicians 1276:. Assuming your l'HĂ´pital is 945:List of amateur mathematicians 903:List of amateur mathematicians 899:List of amateur mathematicians 740:List of amateur mathematicians 716:List of amateur mathematicians 702:. Outside of the main tree at 121:women in developmental biology 1: 1666:which proclaims the obvious " 784:Hirsch, Christian R. (1985). 427:Category:Exclaves in Kentucky 380:Category:Exclaves in Kentucky 292:Category:Musicians from Assam 30: 1484:Category:Amateur astronomers 1330:Category:Amateur astronomers 943:It is inappropriate to have 722:were technically amateurs. 166:women in development biology 1486:and other such structures. 288:Category:Musicians of Assam 242:Category:Musicians of Assam 1755: 1496:23:15, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1474:22:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1457:18:01, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1436:16:45, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1378:22:41, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1350:15:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1313:15:03, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1294:14:53, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1259:18:07, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1241:14:11, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1220:14:07, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1190:13:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1134:13:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1115:11:25, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1071:11:52, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1053:11:28, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1036:11:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1011:11:29, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 988:09:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 974:07:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 956:08:08, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 935:07:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 918:09:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 884:13:15, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 748:08:08, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 732:07:27, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 706:overlaps several sub cats 532:22:09, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 514:20:36, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 486:14:49, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 332:20:14, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 203:unnecessary split on sex. 153:23:52, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 133:22:06, 31 March 2014 (UTC) 1716:23:00, 7 April 2014 (UTC) 1680:21:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC) 1623:18:50, 7 April 2014 (UTC) 1605:16:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC) 1584:17:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC) 1561:01:37, 2 April 2014 (UTC) 1537:10:21, 1 April 2014 (UTC) 1518:00:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC) 1506:Category:Restaurant staff 1401:00:27, 1 April 2014 (UTC) 805:Burton, David M. (1995). 763:Paultre, Patrick (2011). 637:01:34, 8 April 2014 (UTC) 566:18:48, 7 April 2014 (UTC) 549:16:47, 6 April 2014 (UTC) 418:00:45, 8 April 2014 (UTC) 351:22:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC) 341:. The logic seems fine. 280:23:32, 8 April 2014 (UTC) 213:18:47, 7 April 2014 (UTC) 196:16:44, 6 April 2014 (UTC) 179:00:46, 1 April 2014 (UTC) 110:Category:Women biologists 98:00:46, 8 April 2014 (UTC) 1727:Please do not modify it. 1332:, it has a head article 811:. Wm. C. Brown. p. 430. 605:Please do not modify it. 577:Please do not modify it. 390:Please do not modify it. 362:Please do not modify it. 252:Please do not modify it. 224:Please do not modify it. 70:Please do not modify it. 1660:Category:Mathematicians 1424:Category:Mathematicians 1420:Category:Mathematicians 704:Category:Mathematicians 1278:Guillaume de l'HĂ´pital 1101: 949:List of mathematicians 907:List of mathematicians 766:Dynamics of Structures 689:Nominator's rationale: 463:Nominator's rationale: 299:Nominator's rationale: 1096: 117:Nominator's rationale 1708:Lesser Cartographies 1305:Lesser Cartographies 1274:gentleman scientists 1107:Lesser Cartographies 1063:Lesser Cartographies 1003:Lesser Cartographies 876:Lesser Cartographies 841:"Changing Attitudes" 947:to be a sublist of 905:to be a sublist of 470:Enclave and exclave 1325:Knowledge:DEFINING 846:. Springer. p. 53. 319:Musicians from Foo 311:Musicians from Foo 1548:Amateur astronomy 1466:John Pack Lambert 1365:Leopold Kronecker 1334:Amateur astronomy 1315: 859:Missing or empty 645: 642:non-admin closure 524:John Pack Lambert 324: 125:John Pack Lambert 51: 50: 1746: 1729: 1669: 1662:which points to 1657: 1449:Bill Cherowitzo 1302: 1212: 868: 862: 857: 855: 847: 845: 834: 821: 800: 779: 769:. Wiley. p. 76. 682: 681: 649:Propose deleting 639: 607: 579: 456: 455: 423:Propose deleting 392: 364: 322: 317:) or residence ( 315:Fooian musicians 307:Fooian musicians 285:Propose renaming 254: 226: 170:women in biology 72: 47: 36: 31: 1754: 1753: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1745: 1744: 1743: 1742: 1736:deletion review 1725: 1658:" with that at 1632:Martin Gardener 1368:mathematician?— 1210: 1160:nor anyone else 983:more accurate. 858: 848: 843: 839:Puu, T (2006). 838: 824: 818: 804: 797: 783: 776: 762: 655: 651: 629:DavidLeighEllis 614:deletion review 603: 597: 592: 586:deletion review 575: 429: 425: 415:Good Ol’factory 399:deletion review 388: 382: 377: 371:deletion review 360: 277:Good Ol’factory 261:deletion review 250: 244: 239: 233:deletion review 222: 103:Propose merging 95:Good Ol’factory 79:deletion review 68: 62: 57: 52: 45: 34: 26: 25: 24: 12: 11: 5: 1752: 1750: 1741: 1740: 1720: 1719: 1718: 1682: 1625: 1615:Carlossuarez46 1607: 1589: 1588: 1587: 1586: 1576:Obi-Wan Kenobi 1564: 1563: 1540: 1539: 1521: 1520: 1510:Obi-Wan Kenobi 1498: 1476: 1459: 1438: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1406: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1381: 1380: 1370:David Eppstein 1317: 1316: 1297: 1296: 1266: 1265: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1261: 1244: 1243: 1222: 1211:SĹ‚awomir BiaĹ‚y 1193: 1192: 1173: 1172: 1171: 1163: 1156: 1153: 1143: 1142: 1136: 1118: 1117: 1102: 1093: 1092: 1078: 1077: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1056: 1055: 1039: 1038: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1015: 1014: 1013: 991: 990: 977: 976: 966:David Eppstein 962:Martin Gardner 958: 938: 937: 927:David Eppstein 920: 911:David Eppstein 891: 890: 889: 888: 887: 886: 870: 869: 835: 822: 816: 801: 795: 780: 774: 758: 757: 751: 750: 686: 685: 684: 683: 619: 618: 598: 596: 593: 591: 590: 570: 569: 558:Carlossuarez46 551: 534: 516: 489: 488: 460: 459: 458: 457: 404: 403: 383: 381: 378: 376: 375: 355: 354: 335: 334: 296: 295: 294: 266: 265: 245: 243: 240: 238: 237: 217: 216: 215: 205:Carlossuarez46 198: 181: 155: 145:Obi-Wan Kenobi 136: 135: 114: 113: 112: 84: 83: 63: 61: 58: 56: 53: 49: 48: 40: 29: 27: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1751: 1739: 1737: 1733: 1728: 1722: 1721: 1717: 1713: 1709: 1705: 1701: 1697: 1693: 1690: 1686: 1683: 1681: 1677: 1673: 1665: 1664:Mathematician 1661: 1655: 1649: 1645: 1641: 1637: 1633: 1629: 1626: 1624: 1620: 1616: 1611: 1608: 1606: 1602: 1598: 1597:Peterkingiron 1594: 1591: 1590: 1585: 1581: 1577: 1572: 1568: 1567: 1566: 1565: 1562: 1558: 1554: 1549: 1545: 1542: 1541: 1538: 1534: 1530: 1526: 1523: 1522: 1519: 1515: 1511: 1507: 1502: 1499: 1497: 1493: 1489: 1485: 1480: 1477: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1463: 1460: 1458: 1454: 1450: 1446: 1442: 1439: 1437: 1433: 1429: 1425: 1421: 1417: 1414: 1413: 1402: 1398: 1394: 1390: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1379: 1375: 1371: 1366: 1362: 1358: 1355: 1354: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1347: 1343: 1339: 1335: 1331: 1326: 1322: 1319: 1318: 1314: 1310: 1306: 1301: 1300: 1299: 1298: 1295: 1291: 1287: 1283: 1279: 1275: 1271: 1268: 1267: 1260: 1256: 1252: 1248: 1247: 1246: 1245: 1242: 1238: 1234: 1230: 1226: 1223: 1221: 1217: 1213: 1206: 1202: 1198: 1195: 1194: 1191: 1187: 1183: 1178: 1174: 1168: 1164: 1161: 1157: 1154: 1151: 1147: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1140: 1137: 1135: 1131: 1127: 1123: 1120: 1119: 1116: 1112: 1108: 1103: 1100: 1095: 1094: 1090: 1087: 1083: 1080: 1079: 1072: 1068: 1064: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1054: 1051: 1047: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1037: 1033: 1029: 1025: 1022: 1021: 1012: 1008: 1004: 999: 995: 994: 993: 992: 989: 986: 981: 980: 979: 978: 975: 971: 967: 963: 959: 957: 954: 950: 946: 942: 941: 940: 939: 936: 932: 928: 924: 921: 919: 916: 912: 908: 904: 900: 896: 893: 892: 885: 881: 877: 872: 871: 866: 853: 842: 836: 832: 828: 823: 819: 817:9780697160898 814: 810: 809: 802: 798: 796:9780873532174 793: 789: 788: 781: 777: 775:9780470394137 772: 768: 767: 760: 759: 755: 754: 753: 752: 749: 746: 741: 737: 736: 735: 734: 733: 729: 725: 721: 717: 713: 709: 705: 701: 697: 693: 690: 687: 679: 675: 671: 667: 663: 659: 654: 650: 647: 646: 643: 638: 634: 630: 627: 624: 621: 620: 617: 615: 611: 606: 600: 599: 594: 589: 587: 583: 578: 572: 571: 567: 563: 559: 555: 552: 550: 546: 542: 541:Peterkingiron 538: 535: 533: 529: 525: 520: 517: 515: 512: 511: 506: 502: 498: 494: 491: 490: 487: 483: 479: 475: 474:Kentucky Bend 471: 467: 464: 461: 453: 449: 445: 441: 437: 433: 428: 424: 421: 420: 419: 416: 412: 409: 406: 405: 402: 400: 396: 391: 385: 384: 379: 374: 372: 368: 363: 357: 356: 352: 348: 344: 340: 337: 336: 333: 330: 329: 320: 316: 312: 308: 304: 300: 297: 293: 289: 286: 283: 282: 281: 278: 274: 271: 268: 267: 264: 262: 258: 253: 247: 246: 241: 236: 234: 230: 225: 219: 218: 214: 210: 206: 202: 199: 197: 193: 189: 188:Peterkingiron 185: 182: 180: 177: 176: 171: 167: 163: 159: 156: 154: 150: 146: 141: 138: 137: 134: 130: 126: 122: 118: 115: 111: 107: 104: 101: 100: 99: 96: 92: 89: 86: 85: 82: 80: 76: 71: 65: 64: 59: 54: 44: 41: 39: 33: 32: 23: 19: 1726: 1723: 1688: 1684: 1653: 1635: 1627: 1609: 1592: 1543: 1524: 1500: 1478: 1461: 1440: 1415: 1389:Charles Ives 1361:Leon Bankoff 1356: 1320: 1269: 1224: 1204: 1200: 1196: 1176: 1159: 1138: 1121: 1097: 1085: 1081: 1023: 997: 922: 894: 830: 807: 786: 765: 691: 688: 648: 626:No consensus 625: 622: 604: 601: 576: 573: 553: 536: 518: 510:Black Falcon 508: 492: 465: 462: 422: 410: 407: 389: 386: 361: 358: 338: 328:Black Falcon 326: 318: 314: 310: 306: 298: 284: 272: 269: 251: 248: 223: 220: 200: 183: 175:Black Falcon 173: 169: 165: 157: 139: 116: 102: 91:delete/merge 90: 87: 69: 66: 1656:discipline) 1445:Deltahedron 1428:Deltahedron 833:. OxfordUP. 343:Vegaswikian 1644:Pythagoras 1342:Salix alba 1182:Psychonaut 1050:Jay Gatsby 985:Jay Gatsby 953:Jay Gatsby 915:Jay Gatsby 745:Jay Gatsby 724:Salix alba 1732:talk page 1441:Weak keep 1167:WP:POINTy 998:everybody 852:cite book 720:L'Hopital 694:. Rather 610:talk page 582:talk page 556:per nom. 395:talk page 367:talk page 257:talk page 229:talk page 75:talk page 1734:or in a 1672:Johnuniq 1488:Alansohn 1282:LhĂ´pital 612:or in a 584:or in a 397:or in a 369:or in a 259:or in a 231:or in a 77:or in a 55:March 31 38:March 30 20:‎ | 1685:Comment 1654:similar 1636:amateur 1553:Chaveyd 1544:Delete. 1416:Comment 1393:Nyttend 1357:Comment 1321:Comment 1286:Nyttend 1251:Chaveyd 1229:amateur 1205:exclude 1201:include 1197:Comment 1046:Vi Hart 861:|title= 666:history 522:delete. 478:Nyttend 468:. Read 440:history 339:Support 162:WP:EGRS 43:April 1 1687:There 1640:Euclid 1628:Delete 1610:Delete 1571:Euclid 1529:Naraht 1501:delete 1462:Delete 1091:p. 94: 1082:Delete 1024:Delete 923:Delete 696:pointy 692:Delete 554:Delete 537:Delete 519:Delete 493:Delete 466:Delete 411:delete 273:rename 201:Delete 184:Delete 158:Delete 140:delete 1696:WP:RS 1028:Oculi 844:(PDF) 674:watch 670:links 495:as a 448:watch 444:links 172:. -- 46:: --> 16:< 1712:talk 1676:talk 1642:and 1619:talk 1601:talk 1593:Keep 1580:talk 1557:talk 1533:talk 1525:Keep 1514:talk 1492:talk 1479:Keep 1470:talk 1453:talk 1432:talk 1397:talk 1374:talk 1346:talk 1309:talk 1290:talk 1280:and 1270:Keep 1255:talk 1237:talk 1233:Ozob 1225:Keep 1216:talk 1186:talk 1170:CfD. 1139:Keep 1130:talk 1126:Dmcq 1122:Keep 1111:talk 1067:talk 1032:talk 1007:talk 970:talk 931:talk 895:Keep 880:talk 865:help 827:"12" 813:ISBN 792:ISBN 771:ISBN 728:talk 678:logs 662:talk 658:edit 633:talk 568:---- 562:talk 545:talk 528:talk 503:and 482:talk 452:logs 436:talk 432:edit 353:---- 347:talk 309:and 209:talk 192:talk 149:talk 129:talk 35:< 1426:. 1348:): 1340:.-- 1177:can 730:): 325:-- 321:). 290:to 108:to 22:Log 1714:) 1689:is 1678:) 1670:" 1621:) 1603:) 1582:) 1559:) 1535:) 1516:) 1494:) 1472:) 1455:) 1434:) 1399:) 1376:) 1311:) 1292:) 1257:) 1239:) 1218:) 1188:) 1132:) 1113:) 1069:) 1034:) 1009:) 972:) 933:) 897:. 882:) 856:: 854:}} 850:{{ 829:. 710:, 676:| 672:| 668:| 664:| 660:| 635:) 564:) 547:) 530:) 484:) 450:| 446:| 442:| 438:| 434:| 413:. 349:) 305:, 275:. 211:) 194:) 151:) 131:) 93:. 1710:( 1674:( 1650:" 1617:( 1599:( 1578:( 1555:( 1531:( 1512:( 1490:( 1468:( 1451:( 1430:( 1395:( 1372:( 1344:( 1307:( 1288:( 1253:( 1235:( 1214:( 1184:( 1152:. 1128:( 1109:( 1088:, 1065:( 1030:( 1005:( 968:( 929:( 878:( 867:) 863:( 820:. 799:. 778:. 726:( 680:) 656:( 644:) 640:( 631:( 560:( 543:( 526:( 480:( 454:) 430:( 345:( 207:( 190:( 147:( 127:(

Index

Knowledge:Categories for discussion
Log
March 30
April 1
talk page
deletion review
Good Ol’factory
00:46, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Category:Women developmental biologists
Category:Women biologists
women in developmental biology
John Pack Lambert
talk
22:06, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Obi-Wan Kenobi
talk
23:52, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
WP:EGRS
Black Falcon
00:46, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Peterkingiron
talk
16:44, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Carlossuarez46
talk
18:47, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
talk page
deletion review
talk page
deletion review

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑