- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such asthis nomination's talk page,the article's talk page orWikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was:promoted byAllen3 talk 17:57, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
... that Swedish mathematiciansLars Hörmander(pictured) andHans Rådström isometrically embedded the nonempty, compact convex subsets of a vector space as a convex cone in a normed space?
- ALT1: ... that mathematicianHans Rådström, known for his work onconvex sets, edited the Swedish translation ofTheScientific American Book of Mathematical Puzzles and Diversions byMartin Gardner?
- ALT1b: ... whenMartin Gardner'sTheScientific American Book of Mathematical Puzzles and Diversions was translated into Swedish, it was edited byHans Rådström?
- Proposed by K.W. 01:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
- Reviewed:Mikhail Kadets (n.b.) by WP-math colleagueUser:Sodin. The Ukrainian version of Banach's epoch-making book is the source for a key result used in the Gurary^2 renorming of uniformly convex spaces, which is reported in Joe Diestel'sSequences and Series. Ostrovskii may well be the world's greatest successor of V. I. Gurariy and Kadet's beautiful tradition, so it's
easy to AGF great to find his website hosting his article in the PAN premier journal. - Comment: Nomination has 196 characters.User:Sodin has the signature "Sasha".
Created/expanded byKiefer.Wolfowitz (talk),Sodin (talk). Nominated byKiefer.Wolfowitz (talk) at 23:11, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Age, length OK. The references, however, need to be formatted properly, citing title, author, publisher, etc. (seeWP:Citation templates). I formatted the first four references, but am unable to continue because I don't readSwedish. I found the article to be extremely technical, and wonder if someone could plug in some plain English, or explanations of terms, to make this read better. Regarding the hook, the first hook is unintelligible and the second one is understandable but not so interesting to a wider audience. Perhaps you could think of something catchy?Yoninah (talk) 21:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
- references: should be better now (I hope).
- technicality: well, this is an article about a mathematician, we tried to explain his professional achievements (in some detail): this is what he is known for. The other sections should be accessible to a general audience (or am I too optimistic?)
- Sasha (talk) 21:44, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
- The article looks much better now, thanks. Now to the hook. I like the second one best, but I have a question: Here you're calling the bookThe Scientific American Book of Puzzles and Games, while in the article you're calling itThe Scientific American Book of Mathematical Puzzles and Diversions. Which is it? Also, isMartin Gardner important? Otherwise I would leave him out. Thanks,Yoninah (talk) 22:13, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
- thanks for editing and spotting the difference (both are correct, one is the title of the first English edition, and the other one is the title of the second one, I have fixed the hook now). Martin Gardner is well-known outside of mathematics (at least, much better-known that Radstrom), in particular for his books on recreational math (but also for many other things described in the article about him). Doyou have any suggestions how to make this more hooky?Sasha (talk) 23:30, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Article seems to be OK at this point. AGF on some aspects of the hook sourcing (includes offline content and Swedish content, but what I can see checks out OK). The Martin Gardner connection is indeed "interesting." I suggest the following variation on the hook:- ALT2: ... that, in addition to his work onconvex sets, mathematicianHans Rådström edited the Swedish translation ofMartin Gardner'sScientific American Book of Mathematical Puzzles and Diversions? --Orlady (talk) 16:00, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
- this is better indeed, thanks!Sasha (talk) 16:16, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Age, length OK. The references, however, need to be formatted properly, citing title, author, publisher, etc. (seeWP:Citation templates). I formatted the first four references, but am unable to continue because I don't readSwedish. I found the article to be extremely technical, and wonder if someone could plug in some plain English, or explanations of terms, to make this read better. Regarding the hook, the first hook is unintelligible and the second one is understandable but not so interesting to a wider audience. Perhaps you could think of something catchy?Yoninah (talk) 21:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Article seems to be OK at this point. AGF on some aspects of the hook sourcing (includes offline content and Swedish content, but what I can see checks out OK). The Martin Gardner connection is indeed "interesting." I suggest the following variation on the hook: