User:Boris Tsirelson

Professor of mathematics; details. Also a Wikipedian; details.

Articles that I created

 * Non-Borel set
 * Conditioning (probability)
 * Space (mathematics)  1500+ visits
 * Probability space  1000+ visits
 * Theory (mathematics)  1000+ visits
 * Proof assistant
 * Schröder–Bernstein property  approved
 * Entanglement (physics)

Articles I've contributed to

 * Plane (geometry)‎  approved; 500+ visits
 * Line (geometry)  approved; 1000+ visits
 * Function (mathematics)  1500+ visits

Articles approved by me

 * Neighbourhood (topology)  500+ visits
 * Countable set  2000+ visits
 * Geometric sequence
 * Covariance
 * Set theory  1000+ visits
 * Ellipse
 * Schröder-Bernstein theorem

To a reader
Trust the information in the articles approved by me as much as you trust the information in mathematical textbooks. (In both cases errors are possible but quite rare.)

To an author (editor, constable etc)
Here is my opinion, probably controversial. All that is only about mathematical articles; about others I have no opinion.

Articles may be compared according to: importance of the topic; accessibility; scope; coherence, and many other criteria. Best articles may be rewarded somehow. However, the approval is not a kind of reward! The approval mechanism is the feature of CZ. If a trustworthy article remains "unapproved, subject to disclaimer, not to be cited", it is a loss for readers and CZ.

"'Some products — such as new drugs and complex medical devices — must be proven safe and effective before companies can put them on the market. ... At the heart of all FDA's medical product evaluation decisions is a judgment about whether a new product's benefits to users will outweigh its risks.' (About FDA Product Approval)"

Approval of a drug is not a sign of excellence, nor a guaranteed absence of risk. It is rather a compromise. The same holds for our approvals of articles.

An approved article can and should be developed further. But (unlike software firms) we should not create versions like 5.3.7, nor even 1.1; after version 1 we should usually proceed toward version 2 (maybe after a year). Only in some regrettable cases version 1.1 becomes necessary.

Improvements of any kind to any article are welcome from everyone at any time, before and after the first approval. They should accumulate toward the next version. A burst of collective activity just before approval, is it a good idea? It can create fuss and bustle, and make an article somewhat mosaic.

Compare it to our Approval Standards Draft for discussion: "Approval should not be denied on the grounds that the article has omissions, unless these undermine the overall balance and accuracy of the article.

Approval is an ongoing process; even if an editor believes that the article has some significant shortcomings, then the article may still be approved, but the editor should declare any criticisms or reservations at the top of the article Talk page to direct further improvements to the article."

Approval is not a festival of outstanding excellence but a routine stage of development.

A quote
It is better for someone to never come to CZ than for them to come to CZ, get a bad first impression and never come back. --Chris Key 01:29, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

170,000 words on a single talk page of Wikipedia
I mean Wikipedia, Talk:Monty Hall problem, archives 16-21. These 170,000 words were added during three months. (The total is much more.) Did you know it is possible?

Our article "Homeopathy", the talk during September and October 2010: "only" 67,000 words...

Links
Sandbox1

report a bug + CZ:How to use Bugzilla + testwiki + templates tutorial + another + advanced + tansclusion + expander + if etc + Forum: Citation template change

CZ Talk:Constabulary + CZ:Approval Process + CZ Talk:Approval Standards + User talk:Approvals Manager + CZ:Personnel + Editorial Council Main Page

Peter Schmitt (contrib) + Johan A. Förberg (contrib) + Christopher Smithers (contrib)

Special:Log/newusers + Special:NewPages

Eric Toombs (contrib) + Olaf Baeyens (contrib)

Compact space + Vector space + Uniform space + Cardinal number + Necessary and sufficient + Quadratic equation

Measure (mathematics)

CZ:Mathematics Workgroup + Category:Mathematics Authors + CZ:Formatting mathematics + CZ:Dozen Essentials + CZ:Introduction to CZ for Wikipedians + CZ:Quick Start + CZ:Home + CZ:Article Mechanics + CZ:How to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles + CZ:Subpages + CZ:How to edit an article + CZ:The Article Checklist + CZ:Using the Subpages template + CZ:Start article with subpages + CZ:Bibliography + CZ:Citation style + CZ:How to edit an article + CZ:How to make tables + CZ:Images + CZ:Templates + CZ:Technical Help + CZ:How To + CZ:Technical + CZ:Technical/How to set up a CZ clone on Ubuntu + CZ:Downloads

CZ:Statistics

CZ:Core Articles/Mathematics + CZ:Core Articles

Complex number + Prime number + Continuum hypothesis + Neighbourhood (topology) + Probability distribution + Entropy of a probability distribution

Sigma algebra + Measure (mathematics) + Measure theory + Ito process + Martingale + Stochastic process + Measure space + Borel set + Measurable space + Conditional probability

Scientific method

definition + WAY + RationalWiki

Know-how
ax+by+cz = d. —