Changes

::#''The cardinality of such a set would be denoted by the Hebrew letter''<math>\aleph</math>: He was right to remove this, too: <math>\aleph</math> without an index doesn't make much sense...

::#''The cardinality of such a set would be denoted by the Hebrew letter''<math>\aleph</math>: He was right to remove this, too: <math>\aleph</math> without an index doesn't make much sense...

::#''The continuum is called so because it was the first (and most prominent) [[Continuous|continuous]] set studied by mathematicians.'' What does this mean? Remove it, I'd say...

::#''The continuum is called so because it was the first (and most prominent) [[Continuous|continuous]] set studied by mathematicians.'' What does this mean? Remove it, I'd say...

All his entries were thoughtful and improve CP.

::All his entries were thoughtful and improve CP. --[[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 16:41, 27 November 2008 (EST)

--[[User:BRichtigen|BRichtigen]] 16:41, 27 November 2008 (EST)

:::I disagree with his removals and your recent edits to the Obama article as well as your past history do not instill confidence in what you are saying. Typos can be fixed, but it's wrong to remove information along with the typos. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 16:44, 27 November 2008 (EST)

:::I disagree with his removals and your recent edits to the Obama article as well as your past history do not instill confidence in what you are saying. Typos can be fixed, but it's wrong to remove information along with the typos. -[[User:Foxtrot|Foxtrot]] 16:44, 27 November 2008 (EST)

::::::::It's too late for me to do my own analysis right now, but I will see if I can add something tomorrow. In the meantime, you could do your part to show how AndyJM's edits were bad enough to warrant a five-year ban. We showed that at least one of his removals was entirely justified because it removed ''wrong'' information. I wouldn't be surprised if his other edits were okay, too. --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 22:04, 27 November 2008 (EST)

::::::::It's too late for me to do my own analysis right now, but I will see if I can add something tomorrow. In the meantime, you could do your part to show how AndyJM's edits were bad enough to warrant a five-year ban. We showed that at least one of his removals was entirely justified because it removed ''wrong'' information. I wouldn't be surprised if his other edits were okay, too. --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 22:04, 27 November 2008 (EST)