Talk:Belinski–Zakharov transform

Primary sources[edit]

I'm not very experienced with writing wikipedia articles, so maybe this is trivial, but anyways.

I do not understand the comment you added: "This article relies on references to primary sources or sources affiliated with the subject. Please add citations from reliable and independent sources. (April 2012)"

If I used peer-reviewed academic papers as a source: isn't it sufficient? What other kinds of sources should I add? As far as I know there is only one book on the subject and it's already in the citations... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yaron hadad (talk • contribs) 22:00, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As a general rule, textbooks are preferred to the original articles. Referencing the original is great, but later works written for a broader audience, offering a more digested overview is better. If nothing else, textbooks tend to correct errors in the original, tend to elucidate obscure points, and report on the latest research. However, for this topic, I think it is OK as is. its interesting, and its sufficiently arcane that it might be a while before some high-quality review article gets written. 67.198.37.16 (talk) 21:59, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]