Talk:Triangulated category

Triangles: Definition

It is not stated as requirement that two consecutive morphisms must vanish in triangles (see Definition).
Rather it is stated as property (see section Properties), but how does this follow from the axioms???!

Best regards, Freeze S (talk) 14:39, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Grothendieck's Idea

under the section Introduction, you write "..was introduced in his thesis by Verdier, based on some ideas of Grothendieck." I would prefer "the ideas of grothendieck" instead. marhahs,17sep2006

Well, OK. It's not a big issue.Charles Matthews 14:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

i mentioned that because it was more correct andnot only a matter of taste. i change it. marhahs,19sep2006

Homotopy category

I would create an own site for the homotopy category. Seems enough material and now the information is partly in chain homotopy, partly in this article, and also in derived category. OK? Jakob.scholbach 04:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, for one thing the reference to homotopy category in this article looks incorrect because the suspension functor is not an auto-equivalence in this category; shouldn't it point to stable homotopy theory (of spectra, possibly) instead? - Saibod 19:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

He meant the homotopy category of chain complexes, not the homotopy category. You are referring to the link in the intro? If you know enough to say whether the link is wrong you should fix it; I don't. Ryan Reich 19:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I realized that I actually don't know enough about spectra to fix this. - Saibod 09:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I fixed the reference in the intro: it's supposed to be the stable homotopy category of spectra. AxelBoldt (talk) 22:33, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

TR3 diagram

Not a big deal, but the commutative diagram explaining TR3 has two g's, the second of which should be an h. I am new here and don't know how to fix this. Ctourneur (talk) 01:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Fixed now. AxelBoldt (talk) 22:04, 31 December 2012 (UTC)