Talk:Antiderivative

Too complex?[change source]

I've just written this article a few moments ago. It is a complex subject and it's difficult to explain the subject in a simple way. I think maybe after the half-way point, the article becomes a bit difficult. It's the first full article I've written, feedback please! Adamd1008 (talk) 15:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe that this topic is definitely one that would be difficult to explain in simple terms. There may be someone in the future who will be able to do so, but until then, I believe a complex tag is needed. Razor flame 22:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply, I will see if I can simplify it in due time. Adamd1008 (talk) 22:26, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Updated[change source]

I've simplified it slightly by removing the $e$ section and splitting the process up into points. Any thoughts? Cheers Adamd1008 (talk) 10:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Improved![change source]

I've done my best to improve and simplify the topic whilst keeping it understandable. Any thoughts? Cheers. Adamd1008 (talk) 16:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needs words[change source]

Needs more words to describe the math. It is a wall of math without a description as to why the math is antideriving.