Jump to content

Talk:Euclid

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AnomieBOT (talk | contribs) at 11:42, 19 September 2023 (Substing templates: {{Lien web}}. See User:AnomieBOT/docs/TemplateSubster for info.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2021


Gwapo ako

No edit requested, closing. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:19, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

old bc/ad used instead of bce and ce.

You should use B.C.E. and C.E. instead of BC and AD as these are old, and should not be used in this article to make it modern. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saralizt13 (talkcontribs) 00:21, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the portrait

From a layman's perspective, the current portrait of Euclid isn't revealing or provides what may be seen as an accurate depiction of the artist. Though the romantic/dramatic element isn't bad, it seems de Ribera made the portrait intentionally dark— which, on a webpage, makes it difficult to see. I propose switching the portrait to something like Euclid statue, Oxford University Museum of Natural History, UK - 20080315.jpg instead. GuardianH (talk) 09:30, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm not sure really what you mean by "accurate depiction", which would be essentially impossible in this case. I would prefer the current portrait, by a well established artist, rather than a rather random statue. In addition, since I don't trust readers to read the image captions, I suspect that have a marble statue (which evokes the ancient Greek sculpture) might make some assume they're seeing an authentic portrayal, where as a painting makes it obvious they are not. Then again, my first point is the crux of my disagreement. Aza24 (talk) 03:39, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is really close to my reasoning, and that's why I changed the image in the infobox. No portrait is a real portrait of Euclid, but this one at least is from a well-known artist. Artem.G (talk) 07:13, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a source for the Elements

This page [1]https://myria.math.aegean.gr/elements is new and gives a free version of The Elements in both Modern Greek and Ancient Greek. Could this be added in the subsection "The Elements" of the section "external Links" ? Antonis.tsolomitis (talk) 13:55, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Antonis.tsolomitis, I would say it would be a better addition to the external links section of the Euclid's Elements article. This article is about Euclid in general, so it would be best to avoid too many links for specific topics related to him, and we already have two Elements links. Aza24 (talk) 23:39, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Euclid is best known for his thirteen-book treatise, the Elements (Greek: Εὐκλείδης; Stoicheia)." Huh? The Greek is unrelated to the latin version. Sorry - not qualified to edit, but it seems peculiar. Bob. 99.95.168.245 (talk) 01:57, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now fixed, many thanks. Aza24 (talk) 03:50, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Scrambled sentence

In the description of the Elements, in the subsection Contents, this phrase makes no sense "a series of 20 definitions for basic concepts geometric concepts". I would make an edit but I am not sure what is intended JRGp (talk) 19:52, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What was intended: "basic geometric concepts". Good spotting, fixed. -- Elphion (talk) 20:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 19 September 2023

I would like to add this reference among the sources online :

  • Bernard Vitrac; Alain Herreman (2023). "MÉδÉE Manuscripts and Editions of Euclid's Elements" (in gb).{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: unrecognized language (link) Alain Herreman (talk) 10:41, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]