Talk:Davenport–Schinzel sequence
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Mhym in topic Need refs
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Shor's paper edit
I am going to remove this reference. Unless the paper is published in print or electronically I don't think it qualifies to be a "reference". Mhym (talk) 04:16, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Need refs edit
Two places:
- "... they appear to have been given their name by Stanton & Roselle (1970)".
- "Following Atallah (1985) these sequences..."
I believe that both are plausible, if slightly useless, but you need to add a reference in each case - otherwise it's an OR. In fact, I think the first of these is completely irrelevant so I would remove it. It's like as if anyone cares who named the Fibonacci numbers - we get it, they are due to Fibonacci. Will wait for your response before doing anything. Mhym (talk) 04:38, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- The Atallah claim can be sourced to the Agarwal and Sharir book (pages x and 2). I don't have a source for the other one. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC)