Talk:Reciprocal times Derivative of Gamma Function

Should I replace a simpler proof with the existing proof?
I discover a simpler proof. The starting point is also Weierstrass form, but using logarithm and derivative to prove it.

This will yield to same result but can be more understood by people.

So should I replace it with the existing proof or just add a new proof?

And sorry for my bad English. --Henry kong (talk) 05:22, 10 January 2016 (UTC)


 * See Help:FAQ/Questions about contributions/You undid my corrections. You can name the existing proof "Proof 1" and put your proof below, as "Proof 2".


 * Please be sure to follow the house style as close as possible. &mdash; Lord_Farin (talk) 10:41, 10 January 2016 (UTC)