User talk:MuhammadDilbar

Welcome to ProofWiki! Since you're new, you may want to check out the general help page. It's the best first stop to see how things are done (next to reading proofs, of course!). Please feel free to contribute to whichever area of mathematics interests you, either by adding new proofs, or fixing up existing ones. If you have any questions please feel free to contact one of the administrators, or post your question on the questions page.

Here are some useful pages to help get you started:

• Community Portal - To see what needs to be done, and keep up to date with the community.
• Recent Changes - To keep up with what's new, and what's being added.
• Check out our house style if you are keen on contributing.
• Main Page talk - This is where most of the main discussions regarding the direction of the site take place. If you have any ideas, please share them!

Cheers! prime mover (talk) 02:12, 24 July 2019 (EDT)

Fully T4?

My source work defines a fully T4 space as being a space in which every open cover has a star refinement. It says nothing about it needing to be T1.

That same work gives the indiscrete space (and a number of others) as examples of a fully T4 space which is not T1.

Please bear in mind that different sources may give different names to topologies with various properties. Please see on Definition:Normal Space#Variants of Name as an example.

Clearly the source you are working from has the definitions of "Fully T4" and "Fully Normal" round the other way from how Steen and Seebach define them.

If, as you say, this is "totally wrong", then you will of course be able to back up your assertion with a source that you can quote.

--prime mover (talk) 03:11, 24 July 2019 (EDT)