Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/Knot polynomial

Knot polynomial[edit]

I don't know anything about math, but just looking at this article hurts my brain. Needs massive linkage, wikification, and why is it is first person? Definitely less jargon and explanation of it. And an actual reference section rather than just at the end of each section. --Dmcdevit 01:42, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Added to User:Ben Babcock/Desk --Dmcdevit 01:42, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm good at math, but we haven't even touched this sort of polynomial, so I must admit that I am largely ignorant on the concept. Moved to Voltaire's Desk. Ben Babcock 16:12, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Added to User:Think_Fast/Desk because this hasn't been updated for over a month. -- Beland 2 July 2005 03:39 (UTC)

Reassigned to User:Android79/Desk; still in search of expertise. -- Beland 6 July 2005 03:05 (UTC)
- I'll take a look at this, but I'm pretty sure it's outside of my realm of expertise. AиDя01D TALK EMAIL July 7, 2005 23:21 (UTC)

Added to User:Goeagles4321/Desk to try and get some movement here. Stewart Adcock 22:41, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Reassigned to User:Flcelloguy/Desk. Please accept or reassign to me. Stewart Adcock 20:40, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It looks fine by my standard. Maybe someone cleaned it up already? I'll accept it, though, and see what else needs to be cleaned. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 23:25, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it still needs work, particularly the intro and reasoning sections. In the intro:

Doesn't state is a field of mathematics
Doesn't define knot
Doesn't define equivalent knot

If you don't already know what this is about it won't make sense (some of this is later on in the article).

reasoning section has some non-encyclopedic tone.

From Alexander polynomial down it looks good (but pretty technical).

If no one else sees a way to improve this let me know and I'll take a crack at ti (but I'll need someone to check my work and make sure I didn't worsen it). RJFJR 04:32, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll see what I can do. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 13:46, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It really looks fine to me. It is a little technical, but it's a technical subject; if you can't understand most of it, you probably won't be at the level to be researching it. I don't think it needs any major changes. I'm clearing it off my desk.
Voltaire|Talk 14:49, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Closing this one. Looks ok to me. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 12:00, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]