Talk:Norm

Meaning in descriptive set theory

So a couple of times, someone has changed the entry for the DST meaning of norm to something like

In prewellordering, a map ...

which makes no sense. Prewellordering is not an area of knowledge. Now if we want to go strictly by the style manual and have each disambig entry start with the word "norm", I suppose I wouldn't be violently opposed to creating a Norm (descriptive set theory) page. It would just be a redirect to prewellordering, I think, since the other choice would just be a dicdef. Then the entry would look like

Norm (descriptive set theory), a map from a set into the ordinals

But while this would hew closer to the style manual, I can't see that it's really any improvement over the existing entry, which is informative and avoids making a redirect into an article where you'd have to search for the term you're looking for. --Trovatore 22:27, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, there is no style guideline that says every entry must start with "Norm", and redirect pages shouldn't be created for that purpose alone. For cases where a usage doesn't have its own article, as with prewellordering norms, then an article that contains that usage somewhere on the page should be linked to, as is being done through the prewellordering link. On the other hand, descriptive set theory speaks nothing of norms, so linking to it doesn't seem particuarly useful or relevent for helping someone find their specific "norm", which is why I removed its link. If norms do have relevent girth within descriptive set theory, applying to other concepts of the theory and not just prewellordering, then I think mention of prewellordering should be omitted altogether; instead, a definition of "norm" should be provided on the descriptive set theory and only that should be linked to from the disambiguation page. Something like:

In mathematics:

...

A blah blah blah in descriptive set theory

With the needlessly specific mention of prewellordering, only one part of DST that happens to use norms, omitted. Of course, I am only speculating here, norm may apply near-exclusively to prewellordering (I'm don't know anything of the subject, as you can tell), in which case prewellordering should be linked to.

You are right that my wording was awkward and made no sense, I only changed it for stylistic reasons (mainly the one wikilink per entry guideline, I also found the parenthesized "See:" at the end weird).—jiy (talk) 21:21, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Norms are equivalent to prewellorderings; someone who wants to know what a norm is should go to the prewellordering page. Nevertheless there is no subject called "prewellordering"; the context in which "norm" has this meaning is descriptive set theory, and I think that should be mentioned in the entry. --Trovatore 21:28, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rock Norms

Geology, igneous petrology in particular, converts the chemical compositions of igneous-appearing rocks from oxides into various other coordinate systems. These very important quantities are termed 'norms' or 'normative compositions'. The more popular norms were defined in the 19th Century, before the research of Norman L. Bowen. The subsequent knowledge that norms need not be related to modes (mineral amounts) has diminished their value as classifications of volcanic rocks. However, norms retain values as classifications of magmas, each having its own, unique use. They should probably be mentioned. Geologist (talk) 01:02, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Normative Principle" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Normative Principle has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 20 § Normative Principle until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:29, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]