Talk:Binary search tree

The currently misleading Deletion subsection

I edited the Deletion subsection to highlight the three distinct cases. Previously, the text said "three cases" but listed five. Someone quickly reverted this change to show five cases again (while the text still says three cases), simply with the explanation that "last version was better". I beg to differ, as the text vs list is simply misleading and as a matter of preference, I claim that my edit was a good improvement over the reverted version.

Please clarify what makes the old version better. Qrwe~enwiki (talk) 22:31, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Deletion does have three cases: (1) if a node have no children, (2) if a node have one children, and (3) if a node have two children. In case (3) have two cases: if the node to be deleted (call it X) have both left and right children, we try to find X's successor (call it Y), and if (3a) Y is X's right child we replace X by Y, but if (3b) Y lies within X's right subtree but not X's right child, we first replace Y by its own right child, then replace X with Y.

So, deletion itself have three cases (1), (2), and (3); but (3) have two cases within (3a) and (3b).

It ought to be indented -- I will make the changes. --WikiLinuz {talk} 22:55, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Indenting the text was exactly how I changed the list, so I don't understand the sudden reversion. Truly, I moreover added highlights in bold text to emphasize the three cases. The latter highlighting was however supposedly a matter of preference, but on the other hand also a distinct change, but both the indentation change and the highlight change was reverted.

I see that you are a major contributor to the article, for which I express my gratitude. However, I suggest letting more people improving this (or any other) document and be reluctant to hit "revert" until objective reasons can be made (such as changing the text into blatant falsehoods or obvious vandalism). Qrwe~enwiki (talk) 11:49, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

You replaced the Wikitext list with HTML tags, introduced bold texts that violate MOS:BOLD, and wrote "fig. 2" when the picture was not a thumbnail (and there was no caption). This article is a WP:GA so such changes ought to be avoided unless it clearly improves the article (which in this case, it does not). The article is already copyedited, and I replaced the picture in the deletion subsection with a more illustrative one. --WikiLinuz {talk} 23:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)