Talk:Equivalence
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 23 October 2018. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Maybe, there can be good to put origins of word equivalence. Sometimes, understanding origins of the words can help us to understand underlying concept. I think that its origin are from ancient Greek or Latin or both (equi- and valence meaning the same value). --User:Vanished user 8ij3r8jwefi 12:48, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
I cannot find an adequate reference to "the ordinary usage" in mathematics!
editI was lead to this page, when I noticed, that a mathematics article had been "improved" by replacing a link to equivalence to a link to equivalence relation. This was 'nonsensible' in the context, which concerned two equivalent polynomial equations.
The problem is that I cannot find any sensible link to "equivalence as in equivalent equations". The closest items I found were Logical biconditional (which however is leaning a bit to formal mathematical logic, and does not even mention the double arrow , and If and only if, which hardly mentions equivalence. Does anyone know about any better page?
To believe that a reference to "equivalence of equations" should be a case of "equivalence relations" is clearly a mistake; but it is an understandable mistake, to which this dab page probably contributed. Its "Mathematics" heading starts with Equivalence relation, and no other item is strikingly more adequate. The dab does contain Logical biconditional, but only under the Logic heading. With the appearance the article now has, tIMHO, that is adequate. I could list If and only if under the mathematics heading; but then it should be accompanied by a few words of explanation, which in general is deprecated in dabs. JoergenB (talk) 21:55, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Broad-concept article
editCan we replace this disambiguation page with a WP:Broad-concept article that could also serve as the main article for Category:Equivalence? The old contents and history would need to be copied/moved into Equivalence (disambiguation). My draft User:Dpleibovitz/sandbox/Equivalence has too much WP:OR for now, so more experience editors are dared to be bold. Dpleibovitz (talk) 22:04, 8 March 2018 (UTC)