This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
Is missing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:69EF:B300:5D73:7AE4:635E:1D3C (talk) 20:20, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
The definition of theta graph stipulates distinct endpoints, but over in the article on biased graphs the article refers to circles (simple cycles) as being in theta graphs. Not a big deal--I suppose they are just using a little abuse of notation. Lewis Goudy (talk) 04:19, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
After dual graph was featured on the Main Page yesterday, I found my way here and started exploring what else links to this page, particularly with regard to individual terms. I made adjustments per MOS:GLOSSARIES as I went. Since Wikipedia doesn't seem to have a concept of a featured glossary, there wasn't any particular gold standard I could look to emulate, but one of the concepts of a glossary (implied but not explicitly stated in the MoS) is that definitions do not need to repeat in their definition the terms that they are defining. This, IMO, makes definitions clearer, and also puts the onus on the term (and not the definition) to be explicit about what is being defined. One side effect of this change is that terms with their own article are not regularly linked directly in the definition. I opted to take advantage of the features of ((term)) and wikilink the terms themselves when they had their own individual articles. Also, given that one of the more likely ways of getting to this glossary in the first place is through a redirect, and that the reader is likely only to be initially concerned about that one definition, I thought it wise to take advantage of the many anchors on the page and wikilink any first occurrence in a definition of terms that were defined elsewhere on the page (as if each were an article's introductory section). I also italicized these links to differentiate them from regular wikilinks to other articles. I don't know that these changes are controversial enough to get into a revert war over, but I'm open to having a discussion about whether they are the best approach. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 22:42, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
I just discovered ((gli)), so I replaced all manual internal glossing links with uses of that template. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 17:53, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
The glossary needs a definition for "direct neighbor" to satisfy the redirect target of direct neighbor. This book seems to define the term, but I don't have a full enough grasp of the material to be able to extract a standalone definition suitable for this glossary. Can someone create a definition for this term? Thanks. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 06:43, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Both Theta0 graph and Theta0 Graph redirect to this page as a whole, apparently in an attempt to create a corresponding Wikipedia page for the theta_0 Graph page on MathWorld. I don't understand the significance of this graph, and the MathWorld page doesn't give any clear indication as to what the best target of those redirects on Wikipedia would be. (Biconnected graph?) If having a definition for this specific concept is useful, can someone add it to the glossary and update the redirects? And if not, can someone update the redirects to point to something more useful? Thanks. —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 06:49, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Would it make more sense to name the !$@ section to something like "Symbols and Notation?" I honestly thought my browser was glitching out and wasn't displaying that section properly. Also it could use some clean up.
Austin.erwin (talk) 23:55, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Fixed (you could have done this by yourself). D.Lazard (talk) 08:48, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
The entry for "block" has four separate terms. I split it into 4 definitions, all under the heading "block". I also corrected the erroneous definition of a block, which said it has a cycle (if it has 2 or more vertices). I also modified the other definitions, which had errors or were too specialized.
Question: Why should "block graph of a graph", "block graph", and "block-cut graph of a graph" all be under "block" but have their names concealed by not being boldfaced? I think this makes it harder for the uninitiated (and some of the initiated). Zaslav (talk) 03:17, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved. Strong consensus. Andrewa (talk) 18:56, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Glossary of graph theory terms → Glossary of graph theory – For simplicity. Compare with Glossary of mathematics. St.nerol (talk) 15:50, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
We wanted to learn all these terms in a flashcard format so we built one and made it freely available. Thought it would be helpful for anyone who wanted to learn the content of this glossary in a flashcard format like Anki to also be able to discover that they exist and have access to it from the source.
Was going to suggest it to be added in an external links section like the following but as it is linking to our own site, following the instructions of the Wikipedia guidelines, thought it would be best to leave this in the talk page for other contributors to see if it would be relevant or see if there was a better place/format to put it
Darigov Research (talk) 19:14, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
It seems it should be omega instead of kappa, as the article says (clique number). Not 100% sure why it says kappa, so not editing myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mtzguido (talk • contribs) 23:23, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Edge(graph theory) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 6#Edge(graph theory) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
I have searched the internet for terms which describe the number of siblings of a node, in the context of a rooted tree. I found the term "unary child", but I do not believe that this is correct usage of the term "unary" since in every other context, it describes the number of children of a node, not the number of siblings. I hope that this group will know the answer. In the context of a rooted tree, are there terms for:
Rossbundy (talk) 16:26, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
We try to reference our usage of the terms head and tail by links to this glossary. Althoug they are in full explained in the entry for arrow, they have no own entries. These could either rephrase the explanation or link to arrow. The point being, that links to #head and #tail would work as prepared in the entry for #arrow.
Should we just edit the glossary? It seems so well-maintained we think there might be a system to the 'missing' entries that we have not yet grasped. 2003:C2:872A:E800:2C16:FB66:F308:4213 (talk) 10:23, 24 November 2023 (UTC)