I see you removed the note about "first article".
Anyway, seems to me to be a fine job, introducing what is to many a difficult subject. This presents the info that is needed to even begin the axiomatic approach.
I saw somewhere a comment that this article is a duplication of effort. Not so. Both this and the set article (whose title is very ambiguous) are needed for different levels of study. --Buz Cory
I did indeed, for two reaons: firstly, until yesterday no comments were forthcoming so I decided it wasn't working; secondly, I was worried that it sounded a little proprietary and unwikian, something like " If there's anything you don't like ask me and I might change it." Certainly the deletion was not intended to discourage comments or commentary, for which I remain grateful
I think what was meant was the set theory article, but nobody seems to be brave enough to refactor it. :-) -- JanHidders