Talk:Causal notation

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Philosophy Low‑importance Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Science Low‑importance Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Mathematics Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's priority scale.

symbols specific for Causality

The symbols on this page are not available in the standard Windows Font Choices including Cambria MathSymb, Latin, and anywhere else. It would be helpful if the symbols used in this work (And all the other Physics/ Chemistry/ etc) that are not included in the standard font packages be displayed in a way the reader can "copy & paste" them to the researchers own paper rather than have to cobble together a fake proxy. 72.206.45.252 (talk) 20:01, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Conflict of Interest – Author Citing Own Paper

I noticed that the content in `causal equality notation' is based primarily on a single paper. The same user adding this information appears to be the first author of that paper. Per Wikipedia’s WP:COI and WP:UNDUE policies, should we consider removing or balancing this with independent sources? I welcome input from other editors before taking any action. 145.109.91.52 (talk) 16:49, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]