Talk:Subring test

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] 2Z

The current statement is inaccurate. 2Z does not form a ring, yet satisfies the criterion with respect to Z. Joeldl 15:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

2Z does form a ring under Z if unity is not a requirement of a ring. _selfworm_ ^{( Talk · Contribs )_} 20:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely. That's been fixed now by specifying the non-unit definition of ring used in the article. Joeldl 20:30, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Repetition

The two sentences:

• "Note that here, the terms ring and subring are used without requiring a multiplicative identity element."
• "This theorem is applicable to rings that, by definition, do not require a unity."

seem repetitive. We should remove one of them. _selfworm_ ^{( Talk · Contribs )_} 20:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm in favour of specifying the definition as early as possible, since there is a substantial difference in the statement. Joeldl 23:01, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Very well then. I will remove the latter statement and keep the former statement. _selfworm_ ^{( Talk · Contribs )_} 04:25, 22 April 2007 (UTC)