Talk:Topos

The result of the move request was: No consensus no active discussion on this topic, nom appears to have abandoned the discussion. Closing editor also believe t

Talk:Topos

Requested move 7 October 2015

Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments4 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus no active discussion on this topic, nom appears to have abandoned the discussion. Closing editor also believe the comment from Ozob to be valid and should be answered before moving. A quick review supports not moving without further explanation. Tiggerjay (talk) 19:34, 22 October 2015 (UTC) Tiggerjay (talk) 19:34, 22 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

(non-admin closure)

– The category theoretic definition should not be the primary topic. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 21:15, 7 October 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Natg 19 (talk) 00:56, 15 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

  • Comment. Can you explain why mathematical topoi should not be the primary topic? Ozob (talk) 01:41, 15 October 2015 (UTC)Reply
    Because historically the term appears for the first time on Aristotle work about argumentation ("The Topics" and "the Rhetoric"). I suggest that the article "Topos" has either a general article addressing not only the mathematician definition but also the other definition (on rhetoric topos and on literary topos), or that the title be changed to "Topos (mathematics)". Cauim (talk) 14:05, 10 May 2025 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Split out elementary toposes

Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I'm going to perform a WP:BOLD WP:SPLIT of this article by moving the section on elementary toposes to its own article and renaming this article to "Grothendieck topos". The two sections are already pretty much separate in this article, each having its own introduction and practically not referring to each other. Moreover, the material about elementary toposes is currently in bad shape but it would be nice to extend it (I hope to get to that eventually), in particular with information about the internal language of an elementary topos, and this would make it quite a bit longer. Note that the idea of a split was already mentioned multiple times on this talk page, here and here and here. Jean Abou Samra (talk) 19:06, 6 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.