Re:Absolute truths on Wikipedia? (Score 1)

Maybe not so funny. The main engine for "truth" at Wikipedia is citation of a verifiable reference. Allowing for deductive logic would at least complicate the job for many editors, who would call it "Original Research" (which is disallowed). In the cast of the Totient Function proofs example, those proofs are all in books, some can be cited, so the only issue is notability. But it introduces the possibility of establishing the truth of something by giving an explicit proof, more plausible in math than most disciplines. Many editors wouldn't want the responsibility of validating a proof and would object to it as O.R., but in fact we all make reasonable inferences when we compose prose glosses of things for articles. It's a grey area with lots of room for debate. --yoof