Difference between revisions of "Talk:Euler line"
m |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Edited :) -- JeriC | Edited :) -- JeriC | ||
| + | |||
| + | Actually, I prefer Euler line. (I think it's referenced as such in most published materials anyhow, but I can't support my claim.) I also think that it in general, it is usual to name geometric objects after their discoverers without using possessives (e.g., the Simson line, Brocard point, Fermat point). I think that the reason for this might be that "The Euler line of triangle <math>\displaystyle ABC</math>" sounds much less silly than "The Euler's line of triangle <math>\displaystyle ABC</math>". But in any event, if you rename an article, you should rename its associated discussion section as well. —[[User:Boy Soprano II|Boy Soprano II]] 18:50, 4 November 2006 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 18:50, 4 November 2006
Should "Euler's line" redirect here or should "Euler line" redirect to "Euler's line"? I think the second is better, because it's his line. --I_like_pie 16:46, 4 November 2006 (EST)
Edited :) -- JeriC
Actually, I prefer Euler line. (I think it's referenced as such in most published materials anyhow, but I can't support my claim.) I also think that it in general, it is usual to name geometric objects after their discoverers without using possessives (e.g., the Simson line, Brocard point, Fermat point). I think that the reason for this might be that "The Euler line of triangle 
" sounds much less silly than "The Euler's line of triangle ". But in any event, if you rename an article, you should rename its associated discussion section as well. —Boy Soprano II 18:50, 4 November 2006 (EST)
