User talk:Changbao

Cryptomorphism

Hi Changbao,

Having only done discrete and finite mathematics at university, could you please elaborate on the difference between Cryptomorphism and Homomorphism? Searching for (Cryptomorphism OR Cryptomorphic) on Google Scholar only returns 69 hits using either term which raises my doubts as to whether this term is actually notable enough to warrant its own encyclopedia article.

-- Netsnipe ^(Talk) 05:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Netsnipe. I gave it a shot on the cryptomorphism talk page. Changbao 06:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good job on cryptomorphism, Changbao. I wonder if the article should explicitly say it is not either homo- or isomorphism. Any thoughts? Zaslav 21:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Zaslav; I'm glad you like it. It's a good idea, probably in the opening paragraph, but in ten minutes I couldn't find a way to put it that wasn't really clunky. Give it a shot if you like. Changbao 01:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent reorganization of matroids: Yes, better. Thanks.

I added a sentence to the cryptomorphism article to address the confusion. See what you think. Zaslav 02:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the appreciation. See what I just added to matroids! Hope you like it. I hope someone will write up the homotopy theorem and other important special topics. Zaslav 09:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Model category

Hi. Thanks for your comments on my draft article. I haven't really lost interest in model categories, but I noticed the present article before I got very far into my planned article. I didn't really feel up to merging the two and certainly just replacing it with mine later seemed out of the question. I'm actually away from home right now and rather busy, so since you seem to think what I've written is worthwhile please do whatever you like with it: copy, modify, merge as you will, and I'll watch the progress and help out. Dave Rosoff 15:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intersection homology

To move an article, the correct way is to use the "move" tab at the top of the page; this preserves the history of the article. If you just overwrite the article with a redirect, as you did, it looks as if you accidently deleted everything, especially if you dont put in an edit summary explaining exactly what you are doing. It also removes all credit from previous contributors of the article.

I thought your version of the article an improvement, and was planning to put it back in as an introduction (unless you do it yourself first). The article needs a lot of futher improvement, but usually it is better to improve it gradually section by section rather than just deleting everything and starting from scratch. R.e.b. 21:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]