Talk:Tai's method

I removed the following text added by Octochimps ([1]):

Tai's method is often considered a failure of the scientific process because it rediscovered something which was obvious to most researchers - a very basic part of calculus.

I don't think "often" and "most researchers" are terms that are used by any of the cited articles...and I doubt such a statement can be adequately substantiated.

Also I can't see the following text adding much to the discussion:

Outside of academia, this would be similar to proposing a "new" sport, in which one kicks a ball between the opposing team's goalposts, and calling it "Jerry's Game," when in fact it already exists as "soccer."

Cute, but I think drawing a sports simile is simplifying the matter more than it needs to.

I agree with Octochimps' reasoning of "because the layman unfamiliar with peer-review would not necessarily understand why it's such a failure" (from his edit's summary). I think it needs to be pointed out more explicitly, but I don't like his wording. --janto (talk) 22:26, 12 July 2011 (UTC)