Talk:Lévy's continuity theorem

	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.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-priority on the project's priority scale.

Statistics Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics 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.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Move?[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was casting vote move: this discussion has been up for 8 days. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:30, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lévy continuity theorem → Lévy's continuity theorem — The textbook (Amemiya, 1981) uses posessive form Lévy's, while other textbooks attempt to weasel out of this issue by saying "Continuity theorem of Lévy" or similar. It seems to me that the majority of theorems, rules, lemmas, etc with only a single author use possessive form, except maybe for the most trite cases. User:Stpasha 15:31, 18 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

levy continuity theorem[edit]

Plz gimme real life example or what is the use of this theorem in the field of physics Bharti singh22 (talk) 19:47, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Odd theorem statement[edit]

The statement of the theorem is somewhat awkward to read — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.124.11 (talk) 22:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]