tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Wikipedia’s definition of constant sheaf is wrong)

Unknown G. comments on "Wikipedia’s definition of constant sheaf is wrong" (5295)

2010-05-01T11:50:29-07:00

This makes my post look pretty silly :)

François G. Dorais comments on "Wikipedia’s definition of constant sheaf is wrong" (5294)

2010-05-01T11:46:22-07:00

Martin Brandenburg, who is also the original poster, added the following comment:

I voted to close because the question is no longer relevant (at least, for me) and basically the answer is already given in my question, but I just wanted to make sure.

Unknown G. comments on "Wikipedia’s definition of constant sheaf is wrong" (5292)

2010-05-01T11:30:30-07:00

I think that instead of giving a legitimate question the gloomy title "[closed]," it would be better to write down one short answer summarizing the serious part of the discussion. I'm sure that at least one person would vote this answer up, taking the question out of the unanswered list.

If this were my question, I'd certainly delete it if it were closed. So, if the OP has the same approach, the above suggestion may have two advantages: (1) Leaving the information available for future googling, and (2) not offending anyone unnecessarily.

Andrew Stacey comments on "Wikipedia’s definition of constant sheaf is wrong" (5290)

2010-05-01T11:16:46-07:00

I'm tempted to close as I think that Steven is right. However, just before I clicked the "vote to close" button then another sneaky idea came into my head. If the questioner agrees, then I propose that whoever corrects the wikipedia answer should post an answer saying "I've corrected it." and that answer should be accepted. I suspect that most people are like me and a bit hesitant at editing Wikipedia articles, so the small reward of (at least) 15 rep points on MO might just be a spur to get it fixed.

François G. Dorais comments on "Wikipedia’s definition of constant sheaf is wrong" (5289)

2010-05-01T11:11:47-07:00

This is about question 23167 which currently has one vote to close. Steven Gubkin posted the following comment:

So I think it is clear by now that wikipedia is wrong, and that you are right. I don't think anyone is going to post an answer to this question beyond what is already in the comments. So shouldn't this question be closed?

Note that Steven doesn't currently have enough reputation to vote for closing. I did not cast the closing vote, but this seems like another borderline case worthy of discussion here.