Talk:Autolycus of Pitane

Untitled

Issues, just at a glance:

Incorrect use of ]]/[[ which results in an apparently intended link not being wikified: "[[geometry]"

Why should Autolycus being "born circa 360BC and died circa 290BC" make it less likely that "he played a very important role in his lifetime", which "but" suggests?

"many different ideas": well, I'm glad they weren't many of the same ideas, I guess. Further, this should either not be mentioned or name briefly a couple of the more important ideas. Given that "his works included ...", seemingly obviating the need for that clause, it should probably be removed.

"such as; astronomy" is odd semicolon usage.

"modern day society in many ways": they did? Can one name these many ways, or suggest a few?

"These include; the relation between the rising and the setting of the stars, in [[geometry] he experimented with the ways of a sphere, and last but not least, he wrote books on the movement of a sphere because of this he obviously didn’t think the world was flat."? Beyond the odd semicolon placement again, "these" has no obvious antecedent (my guess is "many different ideas" or "These works", since the more proximate "in many ways" seems to discuss relevance to modern society which the paragraph following ignores), "the ways of a sphere" sounds like a parody of a martial arts movie title, and "on the movement of a sphere because of this he obviously didn’t think the world was flat" is, without context, a non sequitur (why should his belief about the shape of the "world" relate to his geometric interests?).

"Autolycus had a unknown life as not much is known about his family": is much known about him as doesn't relate to his family, then? Another non sequitur.

"it seems that Autolycus shared many of the same opinions as Eudoxus (408 – 355BC) as Eudoxus was another astronomer." Not only does this sentence begin as a run-on without closing punctuation from the previous sentence but suggests that all Greek astronomers of the era shared "many of the same opinions".

The rest is just as bad (why is he categorized as a Category:310_BC_births when the article states "Autolycus of Pitane was born circa 360BC" and the linked source suggests seems to prefer neither?). I haven't the expertise to write a reasonable article on this myself, but what exists resembles a poor excuse for a middle school book report to a degree that incremental fixes might not be worthwhile. Nysin 23:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)