Content deleted Content added
Line 10:
I am no longer an active editor on Wikipedia, but I wanted to draw editors' attention to the fact that one of the primary references in this article is of dubious reliability and, judging by appearances, may well have been introduced by an editor with a vested interest.[[Special:Contributions/24.50.177.199|24.50.177.199]] ([[User talk:24.50.177.199|talk]]) 02:26, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
I will add that a French Wikipedian with the same username ("Maimonid") as the one who created the English article became engaged some time ago in debates about the corresponding French one. In particular, on April 9, 2014, he wrote:
''Je ne parlerai pas de mon expérience personnelle, ni du fait que des mathématiciens que j'ai interrogés il y a environ 10 ans l'ignoraient et en furent surpris, bien que plus âgés et bien supérieurs a moi.''
"I won't mention my own experience or the fact that mathematicians I questioned some ten years ago were unaware of it and surprised by it, even though they were far older and higher up than I was." [https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Discussion%3AInt%C3%A9gration_des_fonctions_r%C3%A9ciproques&type=revision&diff=102788976&oldid=101989043]
Compare this with the text of the paper on Arxiv: ''The author of the present article, which was unaware of the papers of Laisant and Key, was lead to the same result by simple geometric considerations in 1999. He then asked several mathematicians (some of renown) if this theorem was not unknown to them. They replied that they are unaware of any previous statement of this theorem, and that they are rather surprised that such elementary a result is not included in any introducing book of calculus.''
This evidence suggests strongly that the author of the non-peer-reviewed Arxiv paper is the same person who created the Wikipedia article and cited the paper. [[Special:Contributions/24.50.177.199|24.50.177.199]] ([[User talk:24.50.177.199|talk]]) 05:56, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
| |||