Talk:Enriques–Kodaira classification
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Proper elliptic surfaces
[edit]The section on surfaces of Kodaira dimension 1 seems to suggest that an elliptic surface is of Kodaira dimension 1 if and only if the genus of the base curve is at least 2. I think this is false. Also this part of the article could be clearer on the question of existence or nonexistence of sections. (Elliptic curves are genus 1 curves equipped with a point.) Would someone like to try fixing this? FactSpewer (talk) 18:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Clarify this?
[edit]"Igusa that they may be equal but still exceed the irregularity defined as the dimension of the Picard variety." 198.129.65.227 (talk) 01:47, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
algebraic versus Kähler
[edit]"Enriques surfaces are all algebraic (and therefore Kähler)" confuses me because algebraic does not require projective and does not imply Kahler. 67.71.1.139 (talk) 03:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
- For surfaces, Moishezon implies Kahler (Buchsdahl-Lamari theorem), and algebraic obviously implies Moishezon. Tiphareth (talk) 09:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)