Original research on the wiki

ixfd64 · 2018-04-23, 18:56

User kar_bon recently brought an issue to my attention that I feel should be addressed.

One user has been adding neologisms to the prime number classes article. I asked for sources and was told by the user that the names were based on League of Legends because they were a fan of the game. Although we don't yet have an established policy on what is allowed on the wiki, I don't feel that we should be adding original research without consensus.

What are everyone's thoughts on this?

CRGreathouse · 2018-04-23, 19:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by ixfd64

Although we don't yet have an established policy on what is allowed on the wiki, I don't feel that we should be adding original research without consensus.

Agreed. FWIW, potentially related/of interest:

https://oeis.org/wiki/User:Charles_R...special_primes
https://oeis.org/wiki/User:Charles_R...ouse_IV/Vanity

Uncwilly · 2018-04-23, 21:55

Would this negate my original research? I did some "where are they now?" follow-up on Noll and company. I exchange a few e-mails with one of the crew to confirm if they were part of the et al or not. I include info from the data in either Mwiki or WikiP.

Also, on M(M(127)) I posted some original synthesis about time to run an LL or TF or some such.

On wikipedia there are some articles where I am a subject matter expert and have edited them with 'personal knowledge' as my source. Often there is not a single on-line source to cite.

That being the case, 'original work' in the areas that were previously mentioned in the OP, be careful of allowing it. The Home Prime section, might be different.

science_man_88 · 2018-04-23, 22:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

Often there is not a single on-line source to site.

Not sure when cite became site, or typo's became okay.

Uncwilly · 2018-04-23, 23:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by science_man_88

Not sure when cite became site, or typo's became okay.

Believe it or not that was my second homophone (I had corrected it from sight). Yeah, dyslexia can be a pane.

kar_bon · 2018-04-24, 08:36

"Prime classes" should be displayed like at Wikipedia: Prime classes sorted by pattern like k*b^n+-c, formula or other attributes. (Such template could be done similiar at Mersennewiki, too)

"Ahri" and "Nega-Ahri" are a special form of Homogeneous Cunningham numbers (at Wikipedia Leyland number).

"Nega-repunit" is same as Repunit with negative bases.

The term "dual" was used for the Dual Sierpinski problem.

Example:
The term "Williams prime" is not approved like "Mersenne prime". Named after H.C.Williams from an article in "Acta Artihmetica" published in 1981 (received in 1977 and others articles earlier, too).
But you can't find any entry for "Williams prime" at Wikipedia, Mathworld or C.Caldwells Top5000 glossary..

Even Carol/Kynea is used in some pages, but seem still "unofficially" named ("Near square primes" in gerneral).

Existing names like Xayah or Rakan shouldn't be used only because of no existing names yet.

2018-04-23, 18:56	#1
ixfd64 Bemusing Prompter "Danny" Dec 2002 California 2467₁₀ Posts	Original research on the wiki User kar_bon recently brought an issue to my attention that I feel should be addressed. One user has been adding neologisms to the prime number classes article. I asked for sources and was told by the user that the names were based on League of Legends because they were a fan of the game. Although we don't yet have an established policy on what is allowed on the wiki, I don't feel that we should be adding original research without consensus. What are everyone's thoughts on this? Last fiddled with by ixfd64 on 2018-04-23 at 18:59

2018-04-23, 21:55	#3
Uncwilly 6809 > 6502 """"""""""""""""""" Aug 2003 101×103 Posts 10617₁₀ Posts	Would this negate my original research? I did some "where are they now?" follow-up on Noll and company. I exchange a few e-mails with one of the crew to confirm if they were part of the et al or not. I include info from the data in either Mwiki or WikiP. Also, on M(M(127)) I posted some original synthesis about time to run an LL or TF or some such. On wikipedia there are some articles where I am a subject matter expert and have edited them with 'personal knowledge' as my source. Often there is not a single on-line source to cite. That being the case, 'original work' in the areas that were previously mentioned in the OP, be careful of allowing it. The Home Prime section, might be different. Last fiddled with by Uncwilly on 2018-04-23 at 23:10

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The Original 'Ode To Joy' thread	Prime Monster	Lounge	1296	2016-06-21 05:43
Original or Remake, which is better?	Uncwilly	Lounge	6	2007-09-15 22:20
Original magic tetrahedron problem (0mtp)	mfgoode	Puzzles	5	2006-04-10 15:51
The original paper on the Crandall/Fagin DWT	Barry Fagin	Math	2	2006-01-04 19:46
monster prime hunting (original in German) Jagd nach der Monsterprimzahl	cyrix	Lounge	6	2004-06-11 08:29

2018-04-24, 08:36	#6
kar_bon Mar 2006 Germany 5621₈ Posts	"Prime classes" should be displayed like at Wikipedia: Prime classes sorted by pattern like k*b^n+-c, formula or other attributes. (Such template could be done similiar at Mersennewiki, too) "Ahri" and "Nega-Ahri" are a special form of Homogeneous Cunningham numbers (at Wikipedia Leyland number). "Nega-repunit" is same as Repunit with negative bases. The term "dual" was used for the Dual Sierpinski problem. Example: The term "Williams prime" is not approved like "Mersenne prime". Named after H.C.Williams from an article in "Acta Artihmetica" published in 1981 (received in 1977 and others articles earlier, too). But you can't find any entry for "Williams prime" at Wikipedia, Mathworld or C.Caldwells Top5000 glossary.. Even Carol/Kynea is used in some pages, but seem still "unofficially" named ("Near square primes" in gerneral). Existing names like Xayah or Rakan shouldn't be used only because of no existing names yet.