@
D.Lazard: You reverted my disambiguation with the edit summary, "The second meaning is unusual and not sourced". It is not normal to place citations on disambiguation pages since they should say nothing that is not in the linked article. The meaning I added is not unusual. On the contrary, it is a common term in electrical network theory and I think you will find that a gbooks search shows it to be the more common term:
example,
example,
example.
SpinningSpark15:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)reply
To editor
Spinningspark: Firstly, your change of the redirect page into a dab page is not correct because of
WP:ONEOTHER: the target of the redirect is clearly a primary topic, as this meaning of a "biquadratic function" is classical and widely used in mathematics for centuries. Secondly, the sentence that you added in the lead is clearly misplaced, as it uses the degree of a rational function, which is not defined in the lead.
However, I understand your concern: As the term is used with a new meaning in circuit analysis, you need a target to link this new meaning. So, hoping that this will be convenient for you, I'll:
This kind of thing has come up on Wikipedia before, an historical term gets hijacked by a modern usage. If the modern use becomes more widespread, it takes the primary meaning, and if indeterminate, a dab page is created. This is what happened at
bandwidth because the IT sense has taken it over. I dispute that the historical use of biquadratic function is primary in Wikipedia terms. Just a quick look through gbooks confirms that. So from my point of view, if I can't have a dab page, I want the circuit theory meaning as the target. Is it going to be necessary to open an RFD on this to settle the issue?
SpinningSpark17:18, 9 April 2020 (UTC)reply