Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/A-class rating/2009

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was No consensus discussion has gone stale.--Salix (talk): 17:24, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aleksandr Lyapunov

[edit]

Aleksandr Lyapunov (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review
Nominated by: Voidstar (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was No consensus discussion has gone stale.--Salix (talk): 17:38, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Entropy

[edit]

Entropy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review
Nominated by: DrKiernan (talk)

This article has several clean-up and citation needed tags, and is currently not A-class. DrKiernan (talk) 11:57, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday I started to completely rewrite the article, which will take some time. The article will, no doubt, look horrible while this rewrite is going on. Count Iblis (talk) 13:47, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there's going to be a problem with the time factor. The review should really remain open while work is ongoing. Starting this discussion page is really just a way of trying to attract more editors to the article who can comment constructively on the improvements or help out with edits. DrKiernan (talk) 14:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was No consensus discussion has gone stale.--Salix (talk): 17:24, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maximum spacing estimation

[edit]

Maximum spacing estimation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) review
Nominated by: Avi (talk) 15:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • I read through the article in detail a couple days ago and copyedited it some. I don't see any significant issues. I am not an expert in the area of the article, however, so I cannot say anything about its completeness. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:27, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I'm sensing a lack of enthusiasm, and while that's almost completely useless as constructive feedback for improving the article, it's also not a good reason for passing it. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:16, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.