Revision as of 15:05, 3 April 2016 edit CBM (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 55,390 edits →Constructive?: c ← Previous edit		Revision as of 05:07, 4 April 2016 edit undo Dicklyon (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers 486,013 edits →Requested move 13 February 2016 Next edit →
Line 355: :The article [[Grothendieck's Tôhoku paper]] has the advantage that people do in fact refer to that paper as "Grothendieck's Tôhoku paper" both in conversation and in writing. I don't ever recall having a conversation with anyone in which Cantor's first set theory article was discussed (but maybe that's because I work in algebraic geometry and not set theory or logic) so I don't know how people refer to it. :Neither the present title nor "Grothendieck's Tôhoku paper" strike me as being appropriate. After all, the papers have names, and I continue to recoil at the idea of calling them something other than their names. Though I'm reminded of [[Haddocks' Eyes]]. [[User:Ozob\|Ozob]] ([[User talk:Ozob\|talk]]) 04:28, 20 February 2016 (UTC) * '''Oppose''' this complicated proposal. The present title seems fine. [[User:Dicklyon\|Dicklyon]] ([[User talk:Dicklyon\|talk]]) 05:07, 4 April 2016 (UTC) == Constructive? ==

Talk:Cantor's first set theory article: Difference between revisions