« first day (3298 days earlier)      last day (38 days later) » 

2:12 AM
@XanderHenderson: thanks for those links about delete / undelete.
 
 
4 hours later…
5:49 AM
close please: I found this via the late answer queue. The question is missing the definitions one would need to solve it - there were links in the comments at one point, but they're dead from link rot. As of now it's not really useful to anyone.
 
 
6 hours later…
11:27 AM
@KReiser Done.
 
 
2 hours later…
1:28 PM
The same question asked by different users: C1 C2
 
1:59 PM
@supinf Did you flag the questions ? The second has been answered twice, the first can (and should be) deleted.
 
@Peter no, I did not flag them. Should I flag both for mod attention?
 
I think, this is a good idea. It is at least suspicious.
 
@Peter Ok I flagged. Maybe its an exam. Or just the same user asking the same PSQ until someone answers.
 
2:16 PM
@supinf OK. I posted a challenge in "Cafe and Tavern on the math.se", maybe you want to join into it.
 
 
1 hour later…
3:48 PM
@amWhy: it's closed now.
@supinf: that question about rotation of line is pure formula based. Even such direct questions are being asked here as PSQ. What has happened to students?
 
@ParamanandSingh Thanks!
 
 
1 hour later…
5:27 PM
@XanderHenderson That's... terrible. It just gives us less incentive to use the low-quality flag, knowing that the author can just undelete on a whim and we wouldn't even know about it.
2
@supinf C2 closed now.
@ParamanandSingh Up for deletion now.
@ParamanandSingh @Peter @amWhy @XanderHenderson @AlexanderGruber: I personally think that this kind of post does not deserve to stay on Math SE, despite being technically not flouting any guidelines, because this site should not be a popularizer for crankery. What do you all think?
 
5:50 PM
@user21820 On the one hand, I agree with you, and voted to delete. But on the other hand, it does exemplify, in the answers, the sorts of things readers should consider/questions they should ask, when assessing the quality and merit of a source. Part of education should be equipping students with tools to critically evaluate sources of information.
 
@amWhy Yea.
Though I suppose we already had an FAQ for that. =)
38
Q: Spotting crankery

EugeneUnderwood Dudley published a book called mathematical cranks that talks about faux proofs throughout history. While it seems to be mostly for entertainment than anything else, I feel it has become more relevant in modern mathematics. Especially with the advent of arXiv, you can obtain research pa...

 
@user21820 Good point. And I'm quite sure we do not want to open the floodgates on all such questions about papers, asking for mathematicians to evaluate for them.
 
@amWhy Exactly! Amusingly, I think there are more such bogus papers than papers from professional mathematicians on the Collatz conjecture!
 
@user21820 heh
 
6:30 PM
 
7:13 PM
@user21820 idk. does refuting crankery popularize it?
on one hand, removing it would "deplatform" the author; on the other hand, if it's still up other places on the internet, the question is a resource for people who want to know what's wrong with it.
I guess I'm neutral on the subject.
 
7:56 PM
I would prefer not deleting it. I think refuting crankery has some value.
 
(No Roomba) I don't think that this is terribly useful, but I am not comfortable permanently deleting it. Towards a new proof of infinitude of primes ( with possible unified application to other primes of special forms whose Infinitude is unknown):‭ - Bambi‭ 2020-03-05 18:24:35Z
 
 
3 hours later…

« first day (3298 days earlier)      last day (38 days later) »