Talk:Graph theory

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Graph theory article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite, and welcoming to new users Assume good faith Do not attack other users For disputes, please see our guideline	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Should this not be explained as a branch of algebra (and ideally also combinatorics, to which it is an introduction).

I dunno, this is Simple English, so... shouldn't complicate it too much....

OK, but algebra is already there. And many Simple English Users do have a very good grasp of math, just not of the way it is talked about. In titles, we err in favour of exact compatibility with the Full English Wikipedia, so that people can find articles in a language they may know better - which they can only do if the articles have the same name.

links[change source]

i think the existent links are not very good. people who want to inform themselves about graph theory, don't want to read, what a street is, or what a function-graph is. I would remove all existent links and make new links to topics exspecially for graph theory, also if this topics don't exist.

--This comment was left on the article itself, I'm moving it to talk: "I would move forth to define a Path, a Walk, A weighted graph, a directional graph. Then make a comment about how all trees are just subsets of graphs. It could also be proven that all connected graphs may be represented as a Tree. There is more to graph theory than explained here."

I don't necessarily agree with it, but didn't feel right throwing it out.