Content deleted Content added
m Maintain {{WPBS}}: 1 WikiProject template. Remove 3 deprecated parameters: field, historical, vital. Tag: |
|||
(15 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{
{{WikiProject Mathematics|importance=mid}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
Line 17 ⟶ 12:
}}
{{Archive box |search=yes |bot=Lowercase sigmabot III |age=12 |units=months |auto=yes }}
== Examples of arithmetic functions ==▼
== Error in formula ==
Line 100 ⟶ 88:
== Too much unsourced text ==
Greetings Wikipedians! The sections listed below violate the [[Wikipedia:Verifiability]] policy. They contain no citations to reliable sources.
* Multiplicative and additive functions
* Notation
Line 106 ⟶ 94:
* Some subsections in Multiplicative functions
* First 100 values of some arithmetic functions
:I disagree. The Notation section defines notation used ''in this article''. The other sections either have adequate citations or link to other articles that define the functions.—[[User:Anita5192|Anita5192]] ([[User talk:Anita5192|talk]]) 13:03, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
::UserAnita5192: Thanks for clarifying. In the interest of Wiki-harmony and good fellowship, I'm willing to concede the point. Good day to you! Cordially, [[User:BuzzWeiser196|BuzzWeiser196]] ([[User talk:BuzzWeiser196|talk]]) [[User:BuzzWeiser196|BuzzWeiser196]] ([[User talk:BuzzWeiser196|talk]]) 12:23, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
: I disagree for all sections or subsections mentioned. All are easily ''verifiable'', and no specific source is needed. --[[User:Sapphorain|Sapphorain]] ([[User talk:Sapphorain|talk]]) 16:02, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
::{{ping|Sapphorain}} Greetings! When you say "all are easily verifiable", do you mean that the reader should follow links to other articles to find citations that support statements made in the [[Arithmetic function|Arithmetic Function]] article? An example would help. I am not trying to refute you. I just want to learn more about standards for verifiability. Cordially, [[User:BuzzWeiser196|BuzzWeiser196]] ([[User talk:BuzzWeiser196|talk]]) 10:57, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
: I mean by that that the material in the sections you list is very elementary and can be found in the various textbooks given as general references in the article: for instance Apostol’s introduction, the Hardy and Wright, the Landau, the Niven-Zuckerman-Herbert, the Bateman-Diamond. All the items in these sections are thus easily ''verifiable'' and don’t ''require'' each time a footnote citing a title and a page. But of course you are welcome to insert such footnotes if you feel like it. --[[User:Sapphorain|Sapphorain]] ([[User talk:Sapphorain|talk]]) 18:44, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
::@Sapphorain: Now I understand. After reading [[Wikipedia:Citing sources]], it seems that this article's "Further Reading" and "External Links" are what are termed "general references...that are usually found in underdeveloped articles." This article is far from underdeveloped. It's quite learned, and would benefit greatly from inline citations, which Wikipedia favors in a case like this. I wish I could help you with that task, but I don't have enough math training to take it on. My best to you! [[User:BuzzWeiser196|BuzzWeiser196]] ([[User talk:BuzzWeiser196|talk]]) 19:41, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Note that in the table called "First 100 values of some arithmetic functions", there are two functions, both called lambda(n). In the code, one has a capital L and one has a small l. [[Special:Contributions/2A00:23C7:9985:1701:963:1B25:CFBB:3FFA|2A00:23C7:9985:1701:963:1B25:CFBB:3FFA]] ([[User talk:2A00:23C7:9985:1701:963:1B25:CFBB:3FFA|talk]]) 12:46, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
:Indeed; I've fixed it. Thanks for noticing! --[[User:JayBeeEll|JBL]] ([[User_talk:JayBeeEll|talk]]) 18:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
|