27

I'd say that this is a bit of a grey area. If you want to ask a question of this type then you should prepare it carefully: do your best to isolate the specific point that you are confused about, explain it carefully, make sure that you understand the definitions of all the ingredients, and so on. If you cannot isolate a specific point of confusion, then ...


11

You have the makings of a good question. To make it acceptable, keep it brief, provide links, and do not add much that is not pertinent. I will use some of my questions as examples of what to avoid. One of my better questions (37679 on Westzynthius) has the disadvantage of including a lot of "necessary fluff": material I thought was useful to setup the ...


11

I see a reasonable amount of mathematics in the answers, together with links to relevant discussions and papers. I think the question is not about gossip, and it is a valuable service to mathematicians who are not themselves experts in the relevant topic such as myself. I should probably add that I find the topic of obvious mathematical interest, and the ...


10

To write a good MO question, it helps to get into the heads of people answering questions - what attracts and motivates them, and what repels and discourages them. The best way to do that is to try to answer some questions yourself and notice patterns in your own behavior; behaviors that intimidate or irritate you are likely to do the same to others. Here ...


8

If phrased the right way (so that there is a specific and direct question that will shine light for you), then such questions should be received well on MathOverflow. Rather than point out possible flaws to a linked version of your question in an (to me) unfamiliar technical area, I encourage you to make a new post to meta, of the following form: I want to ...


5

Questions about the history of mathematical concepts are, in my opinion, a good fit for MO. (Well-formulated, focused, not easily answered by internet search etc...) This includes questions about the origin of terminology and notation. Questions which are not about mathematical concepts but other historical aspects (for instance people) seem like a less ...


3

I think the issue is more of edit distribution over time, combined with my interest level in the subject. I think the list of the problems from Stanley is good, but as it does not hold my interest for long, I am more aware of the post "being in my way", and pushing other content to the side. I won't put it on an ignore list, and I will tolerate it more ...


3

This question (as well as similar questions targeting computations and numerics) is most definitely welcome at Computational Science, where it was eventually posted. While some Computational Science folks are active on MathOverflow, not all are. So, it might be useful to post it on Computational Science or Computational Science and MathOverflow (not ...


2

I think this Q Is a reasonable exception to the preferred scope of MathOverflow, provided: A: you've scanned all the relevant questions on MathOverflow (and maybe even Academia) tagged advice or arxiv or publishing or what have you, B: you've read the relevant questions and answers and found them unsatisfactory, and C: you phrase the question as something ...


2

I don't see a problem. I suggest you change the title to a question, like "Is there a classification of reflection groups over division rings?" or "Is there a division ring analogue of the Shepard-Todd theorem?"


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible