But I still think there is a place in the world for a WikiProofia, where math results (new or old) can be submitted together with a proof that eventually could be mechanically checked.
Perhaps metamath.org? Of course that's mechanically checked, not just potentially mechanically checked. Charles Greathouse Analyst/Programmer Case Western Reserve University On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> wrote:
Thanks, Robert, for your excellent & helpful suggestions.
But I still think there is a place in the world for a WikiProofia, where math results (new or old) can be submitted together with a proof that eventually could be mechanically checked. In the mean time, a human-readable proof would suffice, because math readers who didn't buy the proof given could request additional details.
I would also love for there to be an online version of "Proofs without Words", or "Picture Proofs". (Yes, I know, Bourbaki will be spinning in its/his/her/their grave(s).)
I had thought that Wikipedia might be the germ of such a resource, but its current rules make that impossible.
Since it doesn't appear that those rules will be changing any time soon, it's probably time to start anew.
At 09:54 PM 6/2/2012, Robert Munafo wrote:
Unfortunately, the only effective way to contribute on Wikipedia is to publish it elsewhere and wait for lots of people who happen to also read Wikipedia to think that your stuff is important. Sometimes "wait" means "more than 5 years".
It also helps to think of Wikipedia people as being kind of a niche audience. The real audience is people who use search engines like Google and Bing.
I also think that if you link from your article to other related articles online, the process is quicker. Link to other related content, such as the external links presently used by that Wikipedia article, or be more creative and do your own Google/Bing searches to find other useful articles on circumscription (sic?)
That means turning your .txt into a .html (hint: you can put "<pre>" around most of it) and submit its URL to Google and Bing (see [1] and [2]). You should do that to all of your publshed content, at the very least adding title and keywords tags, which will get your work noticed much more effectively than being linked on Wikipedia.
- Robert
[1] http://www.google.com/submityourcontent/website-owner/
[2] https://ssl.bing.com/webmaster/SubmitSitePage.aspx
On 6/2/12, Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> wrote:
Does anyone know how to deal with Wikipedia?
I tried this morning to make a very modest edit to the Circumscribed_circle article, and someone else keeps reverting it back. [...]
http://home.pipeline.com/~hbaker1/FAQ-circumcircle.txt
[...]
-- Robert Munafo -- mrob.com Follow me at: gplus.to/mrob - fb.com/mrob27 - twitter.com/mrob_27 - mrob27.wordpress.com - youtube.com/user/mrob143 - rilybot.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun