Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Euclidean algorithm/archive1: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 06:16, 30 April 2009

Revision as of 06:57, 30 April 2009

Line 88:

**Yet, is that not why we have separate articles on [[mathematical induction]], [[recursion]] and [[infinite descent]]? Each of which has a well-written, extensive introduction, and with the except of 'infinite descent' has plentiful references? Is your suggestion because you don't like the look of a paragraph without footnote symbols? I'm genuinely confused by your comment, as we don't have a reference in the article for many other terms either (like [[ideal (ring theory)]]. I would suggest just adding some references to [[infinite descent]] instead. --[[User:C S|C S]] ([[User talk:C S|talk]]) 23:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

***Oh, that was not my intention. It is not that I a priori don't like paragraphs without footnotes, I just think it is a service to the reader to come up with a reference. For example [[mathematical induction]] does give a number of references, which is good, but assume you don't have the time nor ability to read that article nor scan all the references given there. In that case, an additional reference (in this article here) would be helpful, wouldn't it? Secondly, it is reassuring to have good surrounding articles, but you can't be sure of what happens with them. (You are right, taking that idea seriously would also mean to add references for all other notions like ideals, but I think ideals are far less crucial to the EA than induction etc.) [[User:Jakob.scholbach|Jakob.scholbach]] ([[User talk:Jakob.scholbach|talk]]) 06:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

****Regarding the first concern I suppose I have a hard time seeing how providing a reference footnote would be helpful. If I don't have time to read one of the linked articles, I don't see why I would have time to go look up some reference in the library or read some other website or read some downloaded paper. I can see the point of the second concern, that something bad can happen to a linked article. I suppose it doesn't hurt to copy over some of the references from those articles; I'd feel a bit too silly doing that myself, so I'll leave that to you :-). --[[User:C S|C S]] ([[User talk:C S|talk]]) 06:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

*''''Leaning to support'''. I haven't looked through the the whole article, but will do so. The "Game of Euclid" thing is not a good addition, but that can be argued (by those who care to) on the article talk page. Other issues discussed above all seem resolved. --[[User:C S|C S]] ([[User talk:C S|talk]]) 23:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)