The h Bar

« first day (2378 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (2850 days later) »

Slereah

22:02

"Partitions of unity were formally introduced by Dieudonne (C. R. 205 (1937) 593-595), and for some time they were even called "Dieudonne decompositions"."

catchy name

Emilio Pisanty

@peterh now that is something that can be fixed. Why'n't'cha write it up on meta?

AccidentalFourierTransform

meta is for pussies

real men use knives

peterh

22:23

@EmilioPisanty I already did.

Q: Would it be useful to link the engineering SE on closed engineering questions or not?

On some SE sites, it is normal that the closing reasons contain also a link to another SE site, where the question could have a better chance to survive: On other SE sites, it is unthinkable and even suggesting this results around -20 on the meta. P.s. this question is not a duplicate of this...

discussion

Emilio Pisanty

@peterh There seems to be a consensus already, so all that needs to happen is the implementation.

peterh

@EmilioPisanty Exactly.

ACuriousMind

::stares at impenetrable mod interface trying to figure out how to change a close reason::

Emilio Pisanty

I would suggest that you add an answer with a proposed wording. (The precise wording sounds like a trivial thing, but it is often where problems come out from under the floorboards if they are there. So it matters to present one that's fully ironed out.)

ACuriousMind

Ah, I see. It's not exactly possible to edit a close reason, and new close reasons must be approved by...someone before they go live. Yeah, we should have a meta post with the exact wording agreed upon by the community before I touch that button.

peterh

22:30

@EmilioPisanty Yes, and because this time the goal is a specific action, and not a more general try about motivating the community into a direction, careful wording is much more important. My other possible ideas had been to write a comment, or to flag the question. Fortunately, ACM is on the way already.

@ACuriousMind Its probable reason is that the close reason of the already closed questions shouldn't be changed retroactively. Probably only CM+ can edit or delete close reasons, the latter would cause db inconsistency if there is already a question closed with this reason.

ACuriousMind

Yes, I agree that the reason is that we can't retroactively tag questions with a reason they weren't closed with. Which is good.

peterh

@ACuriousMind All of the offtopic reason types were approved by shog9, you could contact him. In 2013, also DavidZ approved some offtopic reason types, but these were already deactivated. There is no info in the data SE about the approval mechanism of the close reasons other as offtopic.

@ACuriousMind It is possible, that also another mod can approve a close-as-offtopic reason. I don't know if the vote-to-migrate reasons are counted as offtopic, and what is the mechanism in the case of the other close reasons.

peterh

23:10

@EmilioPisanty I am not sure, the wording is proper.

@EmilioPisanty I tried to include as many as possible from the already available content.

Physics Meta

Q: How to change the close reasons about offtopic engineering posts to contain the link to the Engineering SE?

On this meta post, we have a consensus that it would be useful to link to the Engineering SE on closed engineering questions. It requires a proper wording approved by the community. The current wording is this: This question appears to be about engineering, which is the application of sci...

feature-request close-reasons

peterh

I think it would be useful to mention, that the exact wording is actually totally un-important for me, my only goal to help the mods to act according the community consent. But I am hesiting, how to formulate this.

Emilio Pisanty

23:36

@peterh on topic is two words

Precise wordings matter, because once they've been enacted they essentially become the policy and the on-the-ground incarnation of the community consensus.

And, in addition, writing down a concrete wording often forces you to fully confront any ambiguities and contradictions in your original intent, which can otherwise blend into the background of a vague agreement of what to do.

peterh

@EmilioPisanty Thanks the fix!

Emilio Pisanty

Generally speaking, it doesn't pay off to assume a good wording exists until a concrete example has been produced.