Talk:Correspondence problem

Reference issues
This article needs references! The two works currently cited are quite interesting, but unfortunately neither are suitable references for Wikipedia because they are both primary research articles. The Wikipedia policies state that articles here should be based mostly on secondary and tertiary sources; primary sources may be used in specific narrow circumstances but they should not be used alone to support a whole article or even section (see WP:OR, and WP:USEPRIMARY for further clarification). IMO, both cited articles are also too technical to be used as references (at least, at this point in an article's development) - what's needed are sources for the more general claims of the article that are at least secondary (review articles, e.g.) and are more accessible to the lay public. For the moment I'm moving the two current references from the article to here, for preservation, and tagging the page as needing citations in hopes it will encourage appropriate people to add some. This isn't my area of expertise by far and I can't currently spare the time to gain enough expertise to find and evaluate possible refs. I'm also moving what appears to be a review article cited in "external links: papers" to the references section.

References moved:

Pyrilium (talk) 03:13, 7 May 2015 (UTC)