This template is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Although much of the theoretical foundations of statistics are built on probability theory and other mathematical fields, I believe many statisticians feel that statistics is no longer simply a part of mathematics. I changed the
Statistics link to
Mathematical statistics to reflect this, and gave some justification in the edit summary.
User:Fropuff effectively reverted my edit, giving no reason.
Don't be ridiculous. When someone clicks on Statistics in this box they expect to see an article on
statistics (which is still a branch of mathematics the last time I checked). The article on
mathematical statistics needs to be listed for an
AfD (IMHO). --
Fropuff 18:38, 16 December 2005 (UTC)reply
I agree that the article on
mathematical statistics isn't in a good state. However I believe mathematical statistics was one of the major intellectual triumphs of the 20th century, so I'd prefer to see the article improved rather than deleted.
Comments like "Don't be ridiculous" don't help the debate much, in my opinion. Your position that Statistics shouldn't link to
mathematical statistics seems inconsistent with your apparent acceptance of other links in the template. For example, when someone clicks on Logic here they get to see an article on
Mathematical logic, not
Logic. Do you feel this should be changed as well? Part of my reason for linking Statistics to
mathematical statistics was that I wasn't sure if you were objecting to me not using this style of aggressive abbreviation, because your edit summary was silent on the issue. On this broader point, I note that
User:Lethe has since reverted my last edit without comment (as part of a wider edit). This doesn't help us understand his reasons for doing so. Everyone, please make your
summaries of edits on this topic more specific while it's being debated here.
On statistics being a branch of mathematics, did you check with someone who knows a lot about statistics (and not just mathematical statistics)? I'll quote the first sentence from Moore and Cobb (2000), Statistics and Mathematics: Tension and Cooperation, American Mathematical Monthly, pp. 615-630
pdf. (Moore is a past president of the
American Statistical Association.)
It has become a truism, at least among statisticians, that while statistics is a mathematical science, it is not a subfield of mathematics.
The rest of this paper's lead paragraph gives further support to my argument that we should link to
mathematical statistics, not simply
statistics, as do the reasons listed
here. --
Avenue 11:56, 18 December 2005 (UTC)reply
Since no disagreement with my last post has been expressed over the last few days, I will change the template to link to
Mathematical statistics again. --
Avenue 02:39, 22 December 2005 (UTC)reply
too many
This list is inconsistent. Why do we separate
geometry from
differential geometry but not
topology from
differential topology? We could write in the 3 or 4 branches of topology, but I'd prefer to merge the two branches of geometry. Of course, before that happens, we have to make sure that the article
geometry actually mentions differential geometry. At the moment, it does not. I would also like to see numerical analysis, functional analysis, calculus, and differential equations all fall under analysis. And linear algebra and abstract algebra (and maybe category theory as well, but maybe not) all go under algebra. Hmm... this all sounds like a lot of work. Maybe for the moment, it would be better to just split topology. -
lethetalk 20:50, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
I did it, but now I'm afraid of escalation. I feel bad about leaving out algebraic geometry, for example. -
lethetalk 20:59, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
This template seems to have any identity crisis. It seems to me that there are three (different but related) questions it could be trying to answer:
What are the major brances of elementary mathematics?
What are the major areas of (contemporary) mathematical inquiry?
What are the major theories of mathematics?
In some cases, there is no problem (probability is a good answer to all three!). But overall, it seems to answer some combination of the three of these. I think it might be more useful if it were more focused. For example, it has appears to include algebra, set theory, logic, calculus, differential equations and linear algebra because every undergraduate in a mathematical field learns something about this. They are answers to the first question, but they would be subsumed in abstract algebra, analysis, functional analysis and
foundations of mathematics. I mean, it seems weird to see algebraic geometry and algebraic topology in there, doesn't it, when it is something that many people in serious math programs don't learn about until grad school? –
Joke 14:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)reply
I added category theory, if set theory is there, category theory should be there too.
Set theory and
Category theory are certainly the two fundamental revolutions of the XXth century in Mathematics.
Cenarium (
talk) 17:20, 8 March 2008 (UTC)reply
As a professional mathematician, I have to protest the inclusion of category theory as a major field. There are only a handful of serious category theorists working in major research departments, whereas there are scores of set theorists. What are the major theorems in category theory? I can't think of any, although I can think of a great many major theorems in branches of mathematics other than my own.
74.12.132.85 (
talk) 01:43, 12 January 2010 (UTC)reply
Where does this fit in? Also, I think calculus should be split off from its parenthetical position "within" Analytics Analysis. It goes beyond that. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 08:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)reply
It's not analytics. It's called analysis which is mathematical jargon for the study of concepts involving limits. Calculus does not go beyond analysis. Calculus is analysis. I've changed it to Analysis/Calculus.
Charvest (
talk) 07:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)reply
Also the template at present is about the most major fields. If we are going to include things like knot theory then the template should really be expanded to include all the subdisciplines of each area.
Charvest (
talk) 07:58, 29 May 2009 (UTC)reply
Well no categorization is perfect, but I think the point of that is mainly to distinguish elementary algebra amd abstract algebra. Mathematicians often refer to abstract algebra simply as algebra and elementary algebra as arithmetic.
Charvest (
talk) 08:06, 29 May 2009 (UTC)reply
Proposed changes
Arithmetic and trigonometry should be removed - these are by no means "major fields" in mathematics (I've removed them).
Also, I think that a section should be made for differential equations (ordinary and partial), separate from "analysis/calculus" (this one seems to containt to may distinct fields). —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Neworder1 (
talk •
contribs) 20:40, 30 June 2009 (UTC)reply
I would suggest (roughly) following the MSC classification system.
Foundations & (Mathematical) Logic
Algebra
Analysis
Topology & Geometry:
Applied Mathematics: Main topics (left-hand side categories) from the AM template.
This division, using the MSC, seems to be the best available (one-dimensional) hierarchy, and does reflect the organization of the mathematical sciences' review journals.
Thanks,
Kiefer.Wolfowitz (
talk) 16:40, 16 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Hello
D.Lazard. Well, the
Mathematics article and link belong on this template somewhere, as it is the main template at the Mathematics page and seems to be the main mathematics template. In a 'Related' section? You decide, but it does belong on this one. Thanks.
Randy Kryn (
talk) 13:59, 9 January 2020 (UTC)reply
I agree that it is better to have a link to
mathematics, but certainly not at the end with transversal areas. There are several possibilities:
Changing the title into
Areas of
Mathematics (I do not like this very much, but I would not revert it)
Another way would be to change the visible title, but the other way around.
Mathematics (
areas) or even the full
Mathematics (
Areas of mathematics), although one word in parenthesis describes the link without the duplication. Looking at it the latter full name probably fits better.
Randy Kryn (
talk) 15:11, 9 January 2020 (UTC)reply
I agree with the latter full name.
D.Lazard (
talk) 15:57, 9 January 2020 (UTC)reply
It does seem appropriate for the template, let's give it a go and see if anyone objects or has other ideas.
Randy Kryn (
talk) 22:49, 9 January 2020 (UTC)reply