Revision as of 03:29, 14 January 2015 edit Dom497 (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 16,108 edits sign ← Previous edit		Revision as of 14:31, 22 January 2015 edit undo Dom497 (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 16,108 edits →GA Review: haha Next edit →
Line 71: :::It does give the proof. The problem is it's so buried in text that it's hard to follow. Reducing it to just the formal mathematical proof, which is in there, would be much clearer. The attribution 'Cantor' is clear from elsewhere, while discussion should also be separate, or at least clearly distinguished. I don't disagree with [[WP:NOTTEXTBOOK]] but where a proof is short and relevant it's often given. Here the proof is the topic of the article and as such is central, while other sections such as on whether it's constructive depend on knowing how the proof works.--<small>[[User:JohnBlackburne\|JohnBlackburne]]</small><sup>[[User_talk:JohnBlackburne\|words]]</sup><sub style="margin-left:-2.0ex;">[[Special:Contributions/JohnBlackburne\|deeds]]</sub> 16:24, 20 December 2014 (UTC) ::::To all involved, with no progress being made since December 20, I will be closing the review in 48 hours if no progress is made.--[[User:Dom497\|<span style="color:#1F75FE">'''Dom497'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Dom497\|<span style="color:#00308F">'''talk'''</span>]]) 03:29, 14 January 2015 (UTC) ::::You're hilarious. Seriously.--[[User:Dom497\|<span style="color:#1F75FE">'''Dom497'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Dom497\|<span style="color:#00308F">'''talk'''</span>]]) 14:31, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Cantor's first set theory article/GA1: Difference between revisions