Talk:L10a140 link

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the L10a140 link article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

It is requested that an image or photograph of the deformation of "Marilyn's Cross" into a projection of L10a140 with ten crossings. be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Possible hoax (under previous article name)[edit]

None of the citations or external links in the article support anything in the article and a Google and Google Books search for the various terms comes up with nothing (except "it is what it is", which would make a one paragraph stub of questionable notability). Hyacinth (talk) 07:24, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ever since the "Marilyn's Cross" stuff has been added to Wikipedia, I've been struck by an irresistable urge not to touch it with a ten-foot pole in any way. If you think it's overall bogus, I'll gladly quickly remove everything about it from article "Brunnian link". Beyond that, I don't think I want to get personally involved... AnonMoos (talk) 13:53, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All of the images appear to have been created by commons:User:LMcCormick, or Laura McCormick. One uploaded from her account credits her & Rick Mabry. Since in this article they are credited with discovering (& naming) the link, this would appear to be at best self promotion through a non-notable subject and at worst a total hoax. Hyacinth (talk) 21:21, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I cleansed the "Brunnian link" article and "Template:Knot theory"; the rest is up to you. AnonMoos (talk) 05:34, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it is self promotion but I don't see how it is a hoax. Rick Mabry is a published Math prof and Laura McCormick is a student. What is untruthful about it? 174.88.149.39 (talk) 06:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it's not a malicious hoax, there are still the issues of notability and verifiability from reliable third-party sources. AnonMoos (talk) 09:14, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

updated to Original research 216.94.43.4 (talk) 18:02, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Different strategy[edit]

It might have been better for them to start by adding it to the http://katlas.math.toronto.edu/wiki/L10a140 page on Knot Atlas, where all information would have been fully-welcomed (if true). It seems a little odd that they rushed to Wikipedia (where their contributions don't really fit in as well) and did nothing at Knot Atlas. AnonMoos (talk) 20:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded image[edit]

Uploaded a version of the L10a140 link in canonical form (10 crossings alternating), and visually presented in such a way that it's evident it's a Brunnian link... AnonMoos (talk) 18:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My proposal[edit]

It would have a certain amount of inherent notability as the simplest Brunnian link other than the Borromean rings, so I would rename it to "L10a140 link", have File:Brunnian-L10a140.svg as the lead image, and drastically cut down on the Marilyn stuff. AnonMoos (talk) 10:15, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like a wise direction to take it. 216.94.43.4 (talk) 16:03, 1 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jablan website citation[edit]

The sentence reads like this:

In June 2012 it was noticed by Mabry and McCormick[citation needed] that the link turns out to be equivalent to a 10-crossing alternating link previously described by Slavik V. Jablan

Then follows a citation a pointer to the actual reference by Jablan. There's two parts to the above. First is the equivalancy noticed by Mabry and McCormick (and marked for needing a citation halfway through the sentence). The remainder of the sentence merely mentions (and is what seems to be at issue) that there is "a 10-crossing link described by Jablan." There is certainly a 10-crossing link in Jablan's webpage. Certainly there is a question of the equivalency to L10a140 (but isn't this covered by the first citation-needed). 174.88.149.39 (talk) 00:46, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's pretty clear that the middle link in image http://www.mi.sanu.ac.rs/vismath/bor/bor8.jpg on page http://www.mi.sanu.ac.rs/vismath/bor/bor4.htm is the same as File:Brunnian-L10a140.svg -- all you have to do is rotate one or the other by 90°, and they clearly have the same structure (or the same structure except that under-crossings in one correspond to over-crossings in the other, and vice-versa, which is the same thing)... AnonMoos (talk) 03:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image requested tag[edit]

Any knot transformation diagram significantly more complex than File:Trefoil-non-3-symm-flip demonstration.svg is going to be very hard to understand... AnonMoos (talk) 15:44, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]