Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/A-class rating/Maximum spacing estimation

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

Note: Former discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Mathematics/A-class rating/Maximum spacing estimation/Archive 1
Explanation I have tried to implement all the suggestions in the previous discussion, and would like to have this reviewed again. I think it makes more sense for the the mathematics experts to approve the article before it goes, hopefully, to FAC, as most FA reviewers are likely not going to have the same knowledge base that could critique this article on its content. I understand that this process may peter out, as discussed on User talk:CBM, but hope springs eternal . Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 15:36, 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]
- A lack of enthusiasm where, by CBM or in the article. I also request that y'all look at the article again, it has been bery much improved in terms of examples and illustrations. -- Avi (talk) 15:17, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - I meant a lack of enthusiasm as indicated by the number and quality of reviews you're getting here. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:06, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I figured that may happen; especially as it is between semesters. I'd rather get content-related feedback here than at FAC where it is likely most reviewers will be less attuned to the material. -- Avi (talk) 16:09, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Of course, that should not stop you from providing constructive criticism, or a declaration of support or opposition :) -- Avi (talk) 16:10, 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.