Talk:Normal distribution

There are a couple of maths formulae which are not parsing correctly and thus need correcting. --Charles Blackham 14:58, 21 April 2007 (CDT)

I think I've fixed that now. It appears that Citizendium's version of TeX is not yet as versatile as Wikipedia's. Michael Hardy 21:12, 21 April 2007 (CDT)

approval

it seems this article is approaching approval status, it needs some tweaking but so far it seems ok to me. Robert Tito |  Talk  22:01, 21 April 2007 (CDT)

For completeness a small section could be added where physicists and chemists use the normal distribution in interpreting their experimental data as well as the error distribution in the observed quantities. Robert Tito |  Talk  22:04, 21 April 2007 (CDT)

Before approving, consider that this is a 'pure' Wikipedia article at present. IMHO, it would get speedy delete if it was here during BigSpeedyDelete operation. In fact, the article is not that bad, but it still contains some gaps. Measure error distribution (mentioned above) is one of them; from probabilistic point of view, infinite divisibility and stability sections while needed, are, ekhem, underdeveloped to put it mildly. I guess I could find some more examples of this kind at request -- but this is not my aim to criticize without working on it. Further, in part the text is written in form of a 'reference manual', just bare facts with no meaning/explanation. As it stands, it could be very useful for professionals who already know the subject -- but is this consistent with what we want to develop as CZ style of general purpose encyclopedia? See CZ:Article Mechanics. I'd rather suggest that if no further development occurs, the article is to be... deleted. --AlekStos 07:38, 22 April 2007 (CDT)

PS. I believe that our first approved article in Math should be gamma function.