Re: Comments on a wikipedia article on a Timeline of Category theory

[Sergei SOLOVIEV <soloviev@irit.fr>]

I agree that it very much unbalanced - for example, practically all
works on applications
of proof theory to categories are absent. I think that in fact the number of
contributors worth mentioning is maybe 5 times greater, and the idea
to make
a table like in this artikle will generate controverse in any case.

Best

Sergei Soloviev

Ronnie Brown wrote:
> We would like to draw the attention of readers of this list to the
> article
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_category_theory_and_related_mathematics
>
>
>
> We feel that this entry is slanted, unbalanced, and in many cases wrong.
> It gives credit to work at a given time often presented in the form of
> vague ambitious titles or conclusions that give no information on the
> actual theorems the authors either claimed or published at the time.  It
> fails to give credit to many authors for their contribution to the
> development of category theory and its wider applications, and fails to
> describe many developments in the area.
>
> It also fails to give references, which is usually a requirement for
> wikipedia articles, and the `discussion' makes it clear that the
> author(s) of this entry have no intention of so doing, and have not done
> so since the entry was made in 2009.
>
> The anonymity of the entry is also a handicap.
>
> One of us has tried to make a correction, but this is using a sticking
> plaster on too great a problem. The entry fails to come up to the
> standards of wikipedia in scholarship, accuracy and presentation, is not
> really possible to correct,  and should therefore be removed.
>
> We would be grateful for comments on this matter, and for agreement to
> support this proposal to wikipedia.
>
> Ronnie Brown
>
> George Janelidze
>


[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]