« first day (743 days earlier)      last day (2320 days later) » 

02:29
Aug 22 at 1:19, by Martin Sleziak
Posting a dummy post to keep the post from getting frozen. Just in case it could be useful in the future.
 
10 hours later…
12:55
I have finally got around to starting post on meta with FAQ for searching:
1
Q: How to search on this site?

Martin SleziakWhen using this site, it is quite important to be able to find posts on this site which might be related to the question I am interested it - both to avoid duplication (i.e., not asking again questions that have been answered before) and to be able to access useful information already present on ...

This is based on my previous suggestion here on meta: Should we add external searches in some help pages about search? It was suggested by quid and Aloizio Macedo that having a post on meta is better option than editing the help center. (Mainly because in this way the information can be improved and updated by regular users whenever needed.) — Martin Sleziak 6 mins ago
The question and answers are CW so I hope some users will help with improving it.
I am not sure whether or not to include some "index" linking to single answers into the question. (Maybe we can wait first to see how many answers are there going to be.)
So far I have posted three answers: 1. Built-in-search, 2. Approach0, 3. Google.
I am not sure whether to add another answer about "list of questions", but probably it might be useful.
By this I mean mainly the list you get after filling the title in the ask question - this is mentioned in “Maybe answered questions” box on “Ask Question” page is much more useful than “Search Q&A” and many posts linked there: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/linked/25447
Also this post on meta is about the same topic: Trying to ask a question provides better results than normal search.
But apart from this list, it is probably worth explicitly mentioning that when searching for some topic and you have a question which is at least related (although not exactly what you're looking for), checking linked posts and related posts shown in the sidebar might be worth trying.
What would you say? Probably adding one more answer suggesting this as a search method could be useful...?
Are there not also one or two Meta threads listing frequent duplicates? Maybe we can add an answer with links to these threads.
13:10
That's a good point. Or maybe this could fall into the answer with "lists of question"? (Together with the lists generated by the software - in the "ask question" box, linked and related.)
@ArnaudD. You probably mean List of Generalizations of Common Questions and possibly also Catalog of standard exercises, right?
I meant your first link (I was just about to post it myself!) but I didn't know the second :)
I thought there was another one though, I'll look a bit more.
Earlier I also thought about adding an answer to suggest using the "Frequent" tab of the tags, and then I realized you mentioned it in the "Built-in-search". Maybe this would be better with a "list" question? After all, this is something that you can't do with the search engine...
Perhaps it can be included in both answers... I'll admit that it can be considered as a list.
OTOH it can be also considered as a part of the search engine - since this is something you can get when you search just using tags, for example, if you enter this as the search query: [binomial-coefficients] [summation].
It's not easy to write FAQ. If you include too many things, people won't read it since it's too long. If you include too few things, it's not going to be useful. :-)
For example, the MathJax tutorial on this site seems to me too large to be actually helpful to a new user - it might still be useful for somebody searching ofr a specific thing. (But maybe I underestimate the new users.)
I hope that some users will help with editing - and that this post will eventually get into some reasonable shape.
I'll probably let the post for a bit - to see what other users edit and add.
Looking at the post, it seem that maybe the information about the number of views is too specific...? (I have mentioned this in a comment, perhaps I'll get some feedback on this.)
I'll try to get to the post later and add an answer with lists (as mentioned above) - well, unless somebody else posts such answer in the meantime.
I suppose that it will take some time until the post has a form we're satisfied with - there is no need for hurry.
14:15
0
Q: about second residue homomorphisam

Ninja hatori I know that map from anisotropic to anisotropic form. The proof is fine except in the first case they say < $\phi \psi^2$ > = < $\phi$ > when they applay $\delta$ map to < $x^2 u$>. Also can someone explain step 3?

 
3 hours later…
17:12
@ArnaudD. I have added the answer with lists of questions. (It is CW - so it goes without saying that you, and anybody else, should feel free to edit it further.)
Two questions related to what we talked about:
1. Would it be better to move the remark about the frequent tab to this answer? Or perhaps leave it in both answers?
2. Is mentioning search using number of views too specific and would it be better to omit it?
 
5 hours later…
22:38
Should we include also at least one example into the Approach0 answer.
Perhaps it would be good to choose an example which shows strength of Apprach0 - something which should be difficult to search in another way or something where searching using A0 leads to the target very quickly.

« first day (743 days earlier)      last day (2320 days later) »