The Fischbach Prime a mersenne variation

[jasonp]

Indeed, wikipedia is an excellent resource for pretty much anything that is not controversial. Controversial subjects wind up with legions of editors that have an agenda, but that almost never happens for mathematical or computer science topics, and you get references to papers and such that you can read if you don't trust the wiki page.

Originally Posted by 3.14159

It is incredibly stupid to attempt to claim ownership over something that is not even tangible anyway.

Tell that to all the folks that have patented algorithms.

Make it worth money and someone will find a way to stake their claim.

[3.14159]

There is some excellent material in Wikipedia. There is some execrable material in Wikipedia. If you know enough about the subject to distinguish the two and take care only to reference the former I see no reason not to reference it.

Why?

Anyone can edit it. Anyone can add their baseless opinion and treat it as if it were proven fact. Wikipedia =/= Credible source. To say that it is a credible source is pure delusion.

[retina]

Originally Posted by 3.14159

Anyone can add their baseless opinion and treat it as if it were proven fact.

Have you ever tried to do that? How long did your "baseless opinion" last before someone reverted you? Any high profile article will be really hard to put just anything. Some of the low traffic pages are a bit more suspect sometimes.

Anyhow, I often find it a very useful starting point. And sometimes it serves as a useful end point also. It depends upon what you expectations are; too high and you will likely be disappointed.

[philmoore]

A well documented Wikipedia article can be an excellent starting point for someone wishing to learn about a topic that is new to them. Look at the references; they often give a clue as to how reliable the article is.

[3.14159]

Have you ever tried to do that?

No, because I do not edit at Wikipedia.

How long did your "baseless opinion" last before someone reverted you?

Again, did not edit at Wikipedia, so it doesn't apply.

[3.14159]

Also: A bit delayed and stating the obvious, but the kook that posted here failed to realize that those primes are Wagstaff primes.

[S485122]

Originally Posted by 3.14159

Also: A bit delayed and stating the obvious, but the kook that posted here failed to realize that those primes are Wagstaff primes.

And you failed to read the subsequent posts that already stated that fact. Worse you failed to read post #9 in which the OP acknowledged that fact.

Jacob