Content deleted Content added
Line 84:
::You seem to be saying this article should be about the content of the paper. I don't think that's a natural topic for an article, the two results being so divergent. I think the article is fine, but it should say more about the paper per se, and be named after the paper.
::I did find the reference to ''Crelle's Journal'', later, but it's too buried. If the article is about the paper, which I think it should be, then the journal and publication date should be named in the first paragraph, probably in the first sentence. --[[User:Trovatore|Trovatore]] ([[User talk:Trovatore|talk]]) 22:59, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
I, for one, support the move. As [[WP:TITLE]] says, "In Wikipedia, an article title is a natural language word or expression that indicates the subject of the article: as such the article title is usually the name of the person, or of the place, or of whatever else the topic of the article is." If the topic of the present article is Georg Cantor's first set theory article, then the article title almost surely should be the title of that article.
If that doesn't capture the scope of the article, then the article should be revised in one way or another. We can either abandon the idea that the article is about one of Cantor's papers, or we can move some of the material less relevant to Cantor's paper to, say, [[History of set theory]]. I don't see any need for the latter article to spring fully-formed from our foreheads; it could be started and left incomplete for now. Or, if the result would be too short, then I think it's fine for the present article to overgrow its proper scope. Eventually the relevant material can be reorganized. [[User:Ozob|Ozob]] ([[User talk:Ozob|talk]]) 00:25, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
| |||