Talk:Integral expression

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

Should this get redirected to polynomial? Or maybe polynomial ring? Michael Hardy (talk) 18:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, why did you delete the prod? In your experience, is "integral expression" used in the sense described in the article, that is, as basically a synonym for "polynomial"? If it is, then this should probably become a disambiguation page, because the meaning "expression containing an integral" is at least as common. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 18:44, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted it because I thought maybe a redirect with the history preserved might be appropriate. However, it does seem plausible that this could be a disambiguation page. I haven't seen it used that way, but I do think of polynomial rings as behaving somewhat like Z, just as "rational functions" are called "rational" because they're reminiscient of Q. Michael Hardy (talk) 20:36, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think we do need some evidence that "integral expression" is used in this way. I'll ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did a quick Google search, and found that "integral expression" either refers to an expression involving an integral or (much more rarely) a polynomial with integer coefficients (which MathWorld calls an integer polynomial, although our integer polynomial redirects to polynomial ring, which is less than helpful). Anyway, found no sources to support the more general definition (synonym of "polynomial") that the article currently proposes. I agree with Jitse Niesen - this should become a disambiguation page. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A disambiguation page would be fine, though I would have let it go to {{prod}} myself. CRGreathouse (t | c) 17:14, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus seems to be in favour of a dismabiguation page. I will put a courtesy note on User talk:Mghostsoft in case he is not watching this discussion. Unless consensus changes or sources appear, I will create the dismabiguation page in a day or so. Gandalf61 (talk) 08:25, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No response from User:Mghostsoft. I have created the disambiguation page. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for that I haven't seen this page before. Since a disambiguation page has been created, and the listed meanings are reasonable and convictive, the article has became eligible. I show my sincere thanks to all of you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mghostsoft (talk • contribs) 11:15, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]