User talk:218.214.148.161

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Bullshit Factor

Needs to be removed from this article. Use plain English and provide a glossary of terms.

I don't think there's any "bullshit" here. Links to articles on some standard terms are needed. But this is not supposed to be a remedial math article; standard terms are standard. When you gratuitously accuse people of "bullshit" you damage your credibility. Perhaps some parts of the article could be made more comprehensible to non-mathematicians, but that doesn't make them "bullshit". Michael Hardy 01:47, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you didn't understand me correctly. When you gratuitously accuse people of accusing you of bullshit you damage your credibility. Put the article in plain English, because your arguments against it are just plain flawed. Feel free on the other hand to go and create your own elitepedia if you like, but articles posted within this site should be accessible to all. As this pertains to credability, your perception or interpretation of such, I don't have or lay claim to any. I would like to be able to read and understand the article and I would like as many people as possible to do likewise. The author(s) may talk shop within their own circle, the internet may include that circle, but is not limited to it and therefore the article should be expanded to make it more easily understood. Hopefully that is clear and concise enough, and we can cease the dodgy reasoning.

Some subject have prerequisites. Very many thousands of articles on mathematics require prerequisite knowledge and are on topics that can be understood by few non-mathematicians. Do you propose to delete all of them? I allowed that some parts of this article could be made more comprehensible to non-mathematicians, but there are some that cannot and should not. "Bullshit" to me means dishonesty. An accusation that the writers of that article are dishonest would be gratuitous abuse. I don't think there's any of that in this article. I haven't used any "dodgy reasoning". Michael Hardy 23:09, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

OK what about these:

What about all the articles listed at list of mathematics articles (E) and its companion pages? Which ones will you propose to delete? Michael Hardy 23:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

There are also lots of articles like logistic function that will be understood by virtually everybody except those who never think about mathematics at all. Would you propose to delete all of those, on the grounds that that category of exceptions is too big? Michael Hardy 23:43, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] recent edits

Despite your rudeness and gratuitous personal abuse, you have at least one valid point, and I have edited the article accordingly. Michael Hardy 02:36, 31 May 2006 (UTC)