User talk:Ale.rossi91
Please, leave a message after the beep.--Ale.rossi91 (talk)
... beep...
Sources required[edit]
Hello, I'm DVdm. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Continuous function, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 18:01, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- It's a pretty standard proof... if the complaint is only about the source, most books on real analysis will leave the proof of this easy case as an exercise for the reader. Is https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Sequential_Continuity_is_Equivalent_to_Continuity_in_the_Reals an acceptable source? Ale.rossi91 (talk) 18:17, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- Please indent talk page messages as outlined in wp:THREAD and wp:INDENT — See Help:Using talk pages. Thanks.
- Even pretty standard proofs require standard reliable sources on Wikipedia—see our policy about wp:reliable sources and wp:BURDEN. In case you might be looking for exceptions, surely wp:CALC is not applicable here.
- No, wikis are not reliable sources. If some standard textbook contains the proof, you can of course use it. We typically need book title, author(s), publisher, publication year, ISBN and page—see template {{cite book}}. - DVdm (talk) 18:29, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, I replied using the "reply" function of the app, which doesn't indent the replies correctly, apparently. Let's agree about the source before unreverting the change, cause I don't want to start an edit war, ok? I would suggest this one:
Calculus and Analysis in Euclidean Space, Jerry Shurman, Springer International Publishing, 2016, 978-3-319-49314-5, pages 271-272.
- Sorry, I replied using the "reply" function of the app, which doesn't indent the replies correctly, apparently. Let's agree about the source before unreverting the change, cause I don't want to start an edit war, ok? I would suggest this one:
- See
- https://books.google.sm/books?id=wTmgDQAAQBAJ&pg=PA272&dq=sequential+continuity+continuity&hl=it&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjSx7ah0ensAhUFqaQKHd--A4oQ6AEwA3oECAUQAg#v=onepage&q=sequential%20continuity%20continuity&f=false.
- or this (a copy of the two relevant pages on my Google drive), if you don't have access to the book
- https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Zpmgjduk5_11aVRHNdAn3HVVt4F_lNVR/view?usp=sharing
- Would this be ok? Thanks --Ale.rossi91 (talk) 19:41, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- Yep, thanks, that would be ok. I have restored the content and added a cite book template: [1]. - DVdm (talk) 10:32, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
- I'm glad we've reached an agreement. Have a nice day! --Ale.rossi91 (talk) 13:33, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
- Yep, thanks, that would be ok. I have restored the content and added a cite book template: [1]. - DVdm (talk) 10:32, 5 November 2020 (UTC)