Content deleted Content added
Line 390:
:Moreover, these sections are not sourced. This could be a reason for removing them as [[WP:OR]].
:So, I have reverted your tag removals. Please do not remove them again without addressing the issues of these sections. [[User:D.Lazard|D.Lazard]] ([[User talk:D.Lazard|talk]]) 10:08, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
:: According to [[Second-order_arithmetic]] there is more than one PA. Which might be contextually relevant, since the principia used higher order logic, as noted by Gödel 2.1 Definitions https://hirzels.com/martin/papers/canon00-goedel.pdf
:: Nobody uses the terminology "multivariate" in recursion theory. The term n-ary means a function with n-arguments. [[User:Janburse|Jan Burse]] ([[User talk:Janburse|talk]]) 23:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
:: [[User:Janburse|Jan Burse]] ([[User talk:Janburse|talk]]) 12:33, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
About the used references in the article. Instead of Rose as reference for Elimination of Parameters, its seems you could also use Moschovakis 1994, ch. 5.
Line 409 ⟶ 411:
of the banner says there is a "what for" missing by means of an uneducated "I guess" of the layman that put down the banner. It is obviously factual not true for the present text that a "what for" is missing, only a layman that doesn't understand the first paragraph and the last two pagagraphs can claim such a nonsense.
The Lazard explanation tells a different story. It talks about a) addressing people in a common language b) setting priorities for inclusion/exclusion. So the banner should have a different phrasing, to not form the laughing stock of Wikipedia. The banners give not the slightest hint what is not understood. Also the talk here isn't helpful. Absurd claims are posited that there is nothing else than first order Peano arithmetic, and strange terminology like "multivariate" is used. And references to SEP are rejected and ignored.
So I am out, I cannot help a layman who has not sensibility for the topic.
| |||