|Ars Conjectandi has been listed as one of the Mathematics good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.|
|Current status: Good article|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Shafer article reference
I'm not sure about removing the link to Glenn Shafer's self-hosted copy of his essay on Ars Conjectandi. One advantage of keeping that link is that it's available free. The other is that it's possibly a newer version than the one in Econometrics (I haven't checked). Let me know if anyone minds if I add a 'url=' parameter to the current article reference that goes to Shafer's version. This would allow both versions to be reached, since there is a DOI for the other. Glenn Shafer I think cares about Ars Conjectandi in part due to the Dempster-Shafer theory. The latter might conceivably deserve a sentence or two here if anyone can figure out how to state the connection properly. EdJohnston (talk) 00:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
The link to Nicolaus II (1695 - 1726) is wrong. The Ars conjectandi seems to have been published by his cousin, Nicolaus the younger (son of Jacob), cf. Edith Dudley Sylla, Jacob Bernoulli: The Art of Conjecturing together with Letter to a Friend on Sets in Court Tennis, Baltimore 2006 (page 60sq. with further literature on the subject).
Notes to self
All three sections need major revamping, especially content. Legacy will probably be changed least, with some more conflicting views, actual influences (Niklaus and Montmort are not even mentioned; unacceptable). Background expanded to include specifics of correspondences, etc. along with why it wasn't published and the events that led to Niklaus's publishing of the work. Content needs probably to be completely rewritten to be a much better summary of everything. Nousernamesleft (talk) 03:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Removal of Cardan's Image
I think the figure that really deserves to be on the historical Background section is that of Huygens and not of Cardan. Cardan only considered the most simplest problems, and the prior publication of Huygens book rendered his innovations to be insignificant, both in terms of technical contribution as well as later day influence. Huygens little book beats everybody else's in terms of date of publication. (Manoguru (talk) 15:28, 11 December 2011 (UTC))
Two questions about notes/references
- I wonder if note #11 about should be moved to next formula, because the first one is just simple fraction without the symbol in there, and the second one consists of that symbol.
- Where is Shafer 2006? Is it the same as Shafer 1996 I can see in References section?
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ars Conjectandi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130512180959/http://statprob.com/encyclopedia/JakobBERNOULLI.html to http://statprob.com/encyclopedia/JakobBERNOULLI.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at
Archived sources still need to be checked