"

 Redundantly Duplicated Repetitions of the Same Things Over and Over, Repeatedly 

The article is rife with repetition. Just to give one example, the concept of introducing fictitious forces to help when working in a rotating frame is explained (rather repetitiously) in the first sections of the article. Then when we get to the section on Fictitious Forces (which doesn't even belong on this article) is starts out

""An alternative to dealing with a rotating frame of reference from the inertial standpoint is to make Newton's laws of motion valid in the rotating frame by artificially adding pseudo forces to be the cause of the above acceleration terms, and then working directly in the rotating frame.""

Why must we keep saying this over and over and over....?  "