On 17/02/2011 13:19, Carcharoth wrote: > To take the Poincare conjecture example, compare the Wikipedia article > to this accessible explanation. Should the Wikipedia article > incorporate explanatory aspects similar to those used in the SEED > magazine article? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincar%C3%A9_conjecture > > http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/what_is_the_poincare_conjecture/ > > I can say without a shadow of a doubt that I found the SEED magazine > article more accessible and I learnt more from it. Unfortunately the magazine article completely ducks the issue of what the conjecture is. Even on a charitable view, it confuses a necessary with a sufficient condition, which would be the *whole point*. This kind of this is actually why this one has not been solved yet on WP: we (rightly) don't allow people to waffle around the facts in order to claim they are explaining. (If you think we do badly, have a look at a standard mathematical encyclopedia: http://eom.springer.de/p/p073000.htm.)
Charles _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
