User talk:Wlodzimierz Holsztynski: Difference between revisions
imported>Aleksander Stos m (Welcome!) |
imported>Giovanni Antonio DiMatteo No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{Getting Started}} | {{Getting Started}} | ||
'''Welcome to the ''Citizendium!''''' We hope you will contribute [[CZ:Be Bold|boldly]] and well. You'll probably want to know [[CZ:The Author Role|how to get started as an author]]. Just look at [[CZ:Getting Started]] for other helpful "startup" links, and [[CZ:Home]] for the top menu of community pages. Be sure to stay abreast of events via [https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l the Citizendium-L (broadcast) mailing list] (do join!) and [http://blog.citizendium.org the blog]. Please also join the [[CZ:Mailing lists|workgroup mailing list(s)]] that concern your particular interests. You can test out [[CZ:How to edit an article|editing]] in the [[CZ:Sandbox|sandbox]] if you'd like. If you need help to get going, the [http://forum.citizendium.org/ forums] is one option. That's also where we discuss policy and proposals. You can ask any [[:Category:CZ Constables|constable]] for help, too. Me, for instance! Just put a note on their "talk" page. Again, welcome and have fun! [[User:Aleksander Stos|Aleksander Stos]] 06:59, 17 December 2007 (CST) | '''Welcome to the ''Citizendium!''''' We hope you will contribute [[CZ:Be Bold|boldly]] and well. You'll probably want to know [[CZ:The Author Role|how to get started as an author]]. Just look at [[CZ:Getting Started]] for other helpful "startup" links, and [[CZ:Home]] for the top menu of community pages. Be sure to stay abreast of events via [https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l the Citizendium-L (broadcast) mailing list] (do join!) and [http://blog.citizendium.org the blog]. Please also join the [[CZ:Mailing lists|workgroup mailing list(s)]] that concern your particular interests. You can test out [[CZ:How to edit an article|editing]] in the [[CZ:Sandbox|sandbox]] if you'd like. If you need help to get going, the [http://forum.citizendium.org/ forums] is one option. That's also where we discuss policy and proposals. You can ask any [[:Category:CZ Constables|constable]] for help, too. Me, for instance! Just put a note on their "talk" page. Again, welcome and have fun! [[User:Aleksander Stos|Aleksander Stos]] 06:59, 17 December 2007 (CST) | ||
I disagree that "of open sets" was wrong and clumsy in [[Topological space]]; one of the central points to that article was to emphasize that equivalence of topologies was invariant with respect to axiom systems (be them open, closed, neighborhoods). If you suggest there's only one axiom set for topological spaces from the outset, then that whole theme becomes invisible. This is a matter of practicality; not everyone uses the open set axioms, and people need to be aware of the compatibility of these several equivalent axiom systems. Since I don't want to get into an edit war with you, I'll let you add or omit the necessary caveats as appropriate. | |||
Revision as of 09:12, 17 December 2007
Welcome!
| Citizendium Getting Started | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Quick Start | About us | Help system | Start a new article | For Wikipedians | |||
Welcome to the Citizendium! We hope you will contribute boldly and well. You'll probably want to know how to get started as an author. Just look at CZ:Getting Started for other helpful "startup" links, and CZ:Home for the top menu of community pages. Be sure to stay abreast of events via the Citizendium-L (broadcast) mailing list (do join!) and the blog. Please also join the workgroup mailing list(s) that concern your particular interests. You can test out editing in the sandbox if you'd like. If you need help to get going, the forums is one option. That's also where we discuss policy and proposals. You can ask any constable for help, too. Me, for instance! Just put a note on their "talk" page. Again, welcome and have fun! Aleksander Stos 06:59, 17 December 2007 (CST)
I disagree that "of open sets" was wrong and clumsy in Topological space; one of the central points to that article was to emphasize that equivalence of topologies was invariant with respect to axiom systems (be them open, closed, neighborhoods). If you suggest there's only one axiom set for topological spaces from the outset, then that whole theme becomes invisible. This is a matter of practicality; not everyone uses the open set axioms, and people need to be aware of the compatibility of these several equivalent axiom systems. Since I don't want to get into an edit war with you, I'll let you add or omit the necessary caveats as appropriate.