4 ms·

I hate to call a single Wikipedia user out, but every time I see a diagram on a math or science related wiki page that does absolutely nothing to contribute to

I hate to call a single Wikipedia user out, but every time I see a diagram on a math or science related wiki page that does absolutely nothing to contribute to an understanding of the topic and in fact only serves to confuse the viewer, it always ends up having been made by https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Cmglee https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Cmglee A lot of the time, I think it's better to simply not have any visual on a wiki page than to have an utterly unhelpful visual.

whatshisface 7y ago
This diagram makes perfect sense to me, it shows many counterexamples to possible subset relations and suggests some possible subset relations by lack of counterexample. Edit: I can't believe that someone deleted it from the Wiki page. If you deleted everything on Wikipedia that at least one person didn't understand you would be left with nothing, and definitely nothing related to math...
gorgoiler 7y ago
Here’s the Weird number Wikipedia entry with the diagram, as it seems to have been edited out very recently by an anonymous editor: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weird_number&direction=prev&oldid=925992441 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weird_number&di...
- klyrs 7y ago
  What anon taketh away, anon giveth back. Long live Wikipedia
- nwallin 7y ago
  The definition of a weird number is one that is abundant but not semiperfect. I looked for the "semiperfect" label on that stupid fucking diagram for like three minutes. It isn't fucking there. That diagram can burn in the library of shitty diagrams.
metalliqaz 7y ago
There are quite a few users on wikipedia that seem to have a niche that they really hammer on. They do one operation that they know well over many hundreds of articles. I don't know why they do it. Perhaps to get huge edit numbers for their account.
tingletech 7y ago
someone removed the diagram. Some folks are visual learners, it seems petty and mean to just remove diagrams because they don't fit with your mode of learning. The diagram looks helpful to me https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weird_number&diff=925965818&oldid=924815953 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weird_number&diff...
klyrs 7y ago
I'll admit the diagram is complex and takes some time to understand, but that's the nature of mathematics. You cannot skim mathematics. You must parse each and every symbol, and understand all of the parts before you have any hope of comprehending the totality. The diagram is quite helpful in showing the relationships between these peculiar sets of numbers. And it took me a minute to grok it
orf 7y ago
> Removed the diagram that showed various weird numbers. Before reverting, please examine the diagram and ask yourself honestly whether it is helpful to any reader or merely serves to befuddle and muddy the waters of understanding! How completely... arrogant.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
ncmncm 7y ago
I found the diagram highly illuminating, much moreso than the text. Without the diagram, it reads like mush. With, it becomes clear how peculiar (not to say odd, or weird) 70 is.

whatshisface 7y ago

This diagram makes perfect sense to me, it shows many counterexamples to possible subset relations and suggests some possible subset relations by lack of counterexample. Edit: I can't believe that someone deleted it from the Wiki page. If you deleted everything on Wikipedia that at least one person didn't understand you would be left with nothing, and definitely nothing related to math...

gorgoiler 7y ago

Here’s the Weird number Wikipedia entry with the diagram, as it seems to have been edited out very recently by an anonymous editor: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weird_number&direction=prev&oldid=925992441 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weird_number&di...

klyrs 7y ago
What anon taketh away, anon giveth back. Long live Wikipedia
nwallin 7y ago
The definition of a weird number is one that is abundant but not semiperfect. I looked for the "semiperfect" label on that stupid fucking diagram for like three minutes. It isn't fucking there. That diagram can burn in the library of shitty diagrams.

metalliqaz 7y ago

There are quite a few users on wikipedia that seem to have a niche that they really hammer on. They do one operation that they know well over many hundreds of articles. I don't know why they do it. Perhaps to get huge edit numbers for their account.

tingletech 7y ago

someone removed the diagram. Some folks are visual learners, it seems petty and mean to just remove diagrams because they don't fit with your mode of learning. The diagram looks helpful to me https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weird_number&diff=925965818&oldid=924815953 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Weird_number&diff...

klyrs 7y ago

I'll admit the diagram is complex and takes some time to understand, but that's the nature of mathematics. You cannot skim mathematics. You must parse each and every symbol, and understand all of the parts before you have any hope of comprehending the totality. The diagram is quite helpful in showing the relationships between these peculiar sets of numbers. And it took me a minute to grok it

orf 7y ago

> Removed the diagram that showed various weird numbers. Before reverting, please examine the diagram and ask yourself honestly whether it is helpful to any reader or merely serves to befuddle and muddy the waters of understanding! How completely... arrogant.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

ncmncm 7y ago

I found the diagram highly illuminating, much moreso than the text. Without the diagram, it reads like mush. With, it becomes clear how peculiar (not to say odd, or weird) 70 is.