Talk:Glossary of mathematical symbols

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Glossary of mathematical symbols article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months

	This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Mathematics Low‑priority Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

This article is a former featured list candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the article for featured list status.

Adding links in the first paragraph

@D.Lazard, regarding your reversion: I'm aware that Wikipedia is not a dictionary. I added links to common terms because they have precise definitions in math (like "relation") or have multiple possible meanings (like "figure", e.g. chart, drawing, or floating block as opposed to character/grapheme).

That said, I'm fine with some of them being unlinked if there aren't suitable targets, like "action" – I'm not sure that operation is technically correct. It might be worth distinguishing it from group action, but I don't think many people will be confused about that so no big deal.

— W.andrea (talk) 18:34, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, many common terms have a precise definition in mathematics, but the mathematical meaning differs often from the common meaning. This is for this reason that a word used with its common meaning must not be linked to its mathematical meaning. This changes the intended meaning. In the case of your edit, none of the links you provided correspond to the intended meaning. See MOS:OVERLINKING for more details on words that must not be linked. D.Lazard (talk) 20:10, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

none of the links you provided correspond to the intended meaning.

Could you elaborate? I mean, I'm not an expert, but Relation (mathematics) seems correct: In mathematics, a relation denotes some kind of relationship between two objects in a set, which may or may not hold. [For example, "less than", denoted <.]

And what's the intended meaning of "figure" if not "character"? Even if "character" isn't 100% correct, a link could still be useful in clarifying that the intended meaning isn't something else like chart, drawing, etc.

I'm also aware of MOS:OL.

— W.andrea (talk) 22:38, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

About relations: the symbol ⁠${\displaystyle \implies }$⁠ expresses a relation between assertions, which is not covered by Relation (mathematics).

The first sentence of this article is not intended to be a definition, but an explanation of the subject of the article. The introduction of links for words used in the explanation would suggest wrongly that the first line is intended to be a definition. This is what I meant by "intended meaning". If a definition of "mathematical symbol" would be intended, the correct sentence would be "A mathematical symbol is any grapheme used in mathematical formulas and expressions". I found this formulation by writing this answer. It seems useful to add it as a second sentence, introduced with "More formally". D.Lazard (talk) 09:07, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that works for me! I like that format.

I have some other points if you want to reply, but if not, no worries. This issue is settled as far as I'm concerned, I'm just curious about some things you said:

a relation between assertions, which is not covered by Relation (mathematics)

I'm inferring that assertions aren't considered "objects", is that right? (since Relation says "relationship between two objects in a set")

The first sentence of this article is not intended to be a definition, but an explanation

What do you consider the difference between a definition and an explanation?

If it's relevant, guidelines do recommend putting a definition:

• MOS:FIRST: If its subject is definable, then the first sentence should give a concise definition
• MOS:NOTLEDE: the first sentence is usually a definition
• WP:NOTDICT § Good definitions: Encyclopedia articles should begin with a good definition and description.

I'm guessing the difference might be between what I would call a "strict definition" and a "loose definition" (i.e. one that's technically correct vs one that's not technically correct but still helpful).

The introduction of links for words used in the explanation would suggest wrongly that the first line is intended to be a definition.

How does that follow? I'm not seeing the logic.

— W.andrea (talk) 23:44, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Approxlessthan etc

There are also symbols that mean less than, but not by much, e.g. the compared quantities are of the same order 145.53.11.225 (talk) 04:57, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Superset ⊃, ⊇, ⊋

Definition refers to the converse relation, this relation is called superset. I am new to editing so I don't know how the template works on this page and couldn't edit it directly. Apologies if this is not the place to raise this. Ainsley259 (talk) 21:23, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What does * stand for 72.251.151.98 (talk) 03:20, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Plus or Minus

Firstly, I apologize if this is not a mistake but something that arises from different conventions across the globe. But the Plus or Minus sign is said to express a range of values. Isn't it used to denote two possible values? (From the example given: 10±8 = 2 or 18, while a range of values would be [2; 18] no? 85.139.50.43 (talk) 23:42, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No. When used in front of a single number, it indicates two values, one positive and one negative. Thus, "±5" indicates either +5 or -5. When used as an operator between two numbers, it indicates a range. Thus "10±8" indicates the range from 2 to 18. It's often used that way to indicate a confidence interval in a measurement. For example, see Introduction to Confidence Intervals, Wolfram, and our own Plus-minus sign article. CodeTalker (talk) 23:57, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]