This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
A member of the Guild of Copy Editors, Stfg, reviewed a version of this article for copy editing on 28 February 2012. However, a major copy edit was inappropriate at that time because of the issues specified below, or the other tags now found on this article. Once these issues have been addressed, and any related tags have been cleared, please tag the article once again for {{ copyedit}}. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English. Visit our project page if you are interested in joining! |
I listed this article for deletion (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Auxilliary Fractions) but consensus emerged that there is a potential article here, given expert attention.
My concerns are:
Other concerns, taken from the AfD debate:
Minor issues:
I hope these issues can be resolved. – EdC 16:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Although the Wikiproject's mathematics portal said someone would contribute, no one did. Yes, the article needed a lot of revision. I was surprised at the "interest" it generated. Larry R. Holmgren 20:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
It's confusing, especially in its treatment of type 3. For numbers ending in 1,3 or 7, it has you convert it to another type. Better to say this in the type 3 section and then use word like "and then apply the procedure for type ...". For numbers ending in 5 or an even digit, the explanation is simply unclear. So I've added "confusing" to the tags, and marked as {{ GOCEreviewed}} since it clearly needs substantial rewriting because of other tags too. However, I've removed "peacock" from the tags. It surely isn't promotional. -- Stfg ( talk) 14:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
A member of the Guild of Copy Editors, Stfg, reviewed a version of this article for copy editing on 28 February 2012. However, a major copy edit was inappropriate at that time because of the issues specified below, or the other tags now found on this article. Once these issues have been addressed, and any related tags have been cleared, please tag the article once again for {{ copyedit}}. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English. Visit our project page if you are interested in joining! |
I listed this article for deletion (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Auxilliary Fractions) but consensus emerged that there is a potential article here, given expert attention.
My concerns are:
Other concerns, taken from the AfD debate:
Minor issues:
I hope these issues can be resolved. – EdC 16:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Although the Wikiproject's mathematics portal said someone would contribute, no one did. Yes, the article needed a lot of revision. I was surprised at the "interest" it generated. Larry R. Holmgren 20:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
It's confusing, especially in its treatment of type 3. For numbers ending in 1,3 or 7, it has you convert it to another type. Better to say this in the type 3 section and then use word like "and then apply the procedure for type ...". For numbers ending in 5 or an even digit, the explanation is simply unclear. So I've added "confusing" to the tags, and marked as {{ GOCEreviewed}} since it clearly needs substantial rewriting because of other tags too. However, I've removed "peacock" from the tags. It surely isn't promotional. -- Stfg ( talk) 14:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)