Talk:Q66707394
Autodescription — countable set (Q66707394)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “countable set” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
- Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
- ⟨
countable set⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
Union and disjoint queries
- Instances of countable set (Q66707394)
that are instances of two (or more) of the classes: [1] - Instances of countable set (Q66707394) that are instances of none of the classes countably infinite set (Q185478) and finite set (Q272404) [2]
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Sitelinks[edit]
countable set (Q66707394) and countably infinite set (Q185478) refer to, respectively,
- sets of cardinality
- sets of cardianlity equal to
This is a result from a discussion in Talk:Q185478. Some of the sitelinks of countably infinite set (Q185478) was about countable set (Q66707394) (enwiki, kowiki, etc.), and just another one of them about uncountable set (Q1128796) (kkwiki). So I moved them to the correct items accordingly. There were also sitelinks thta leave the titles ambiguous (e.g. dewiki). I didn't move them to a third new item on an ambiguous term, but instead to countable set (Q66707394), considering the most common and most standard usage of the term. I have moved some identifiers to the correct items in a similar way. @Yelysavet can you explain why you have reverted my edit and what did you mean by "can be infinite" in the edit summary? A countable set surely can be infinite, but that doesn't seem to explain your revert. 慈居 (talk) 23:46, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- @慈居 @Infovarius the problem is that many of the links which you moved are ambiguous (for example in English and German). They can mean both countable set (Q66707394) and countably infinite set (Q185478) in different sources. Your bold moves lead to confusion, see for instance [1]. Yelysavet (talk) 18:25, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
- I agree that, as I have noted, abzählbare Menge is left ambiguous in the German Wikipedia article. The article was originally a sitelink of the unambiguous item countably infinite set (Q185478), also. So I don't think my edit led to a growth of confusion, if there was any. As for your example, I think that your edit was reverted mainly because the category is removed. In German Wikipedia, it seems very common to attach categories also to some redirect pages. An example.
- In the English Wikipedia article, countable sets are unambiguously defined as instances of countable set (Q66707394), which is actually the most common practice. It also notes that
To avoid ambiguity, one may limit oneself to the terms "at most countable" and "countably infinite", although with respect to concision this is the worst of both worlds.
- which is marked "citation needed", but I can't agree more. 慈居 (talk) 00:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
- I would add "citation needed" to your "is the most common practice". In Russian the term unambiguosly means infinite set. --Infovarius (talk) 20:20, 25 August 2023 (UTC)--Infovarius (talk) 20:20, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I didn't know that. In English I'm sure that countable most commonly refers to "" (and it's much cheaper to do so), but it might be otherwise in some other languages. I don't mind if you move the "ambiguous" sitelinks back to countably infinite set (Q185478), they're not many though. 慈居 (talk) 00:17, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- I thought German Wikipedia is not the only one, but it is. You can move the sitelink back to the original item if you like. 慈居 (talk) 01:00, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
