Changes subtle errors  Oleg I am concerned about the edits that you are making  My first impression is that it is much harder to understand than it used to be  It used to be precise as to what it meant much of that precision has been removed The result is the sublte introduction of errors   in part by removing that precision  For example the ring over taup is not isomorphic to the ring xnp which is what you seem to be implying the degrees of polynomials are totatlly different if Ptau is a polynomial then  ndeg Ptau  deg Px one is kindoflike the expad of the other sortof  And you cut out the paragraphs that made this distinction tau a is not equal to a tau but tau a is equal to ap tau   The ring is never commutative when the field is not Fp    The field is called Fp not ZpZ dammit We already talked about this before Nobody but you calls it that  Stating that aPx is also additive is important I dont see why you cut that out   ktau is not kx eg the next theorem to mention is that for any px in kx there exists a gtau in ktau such that fx divides gx  These gtaus are a left ideal in ktau  Using language like its quite easy to prove and it follows quickly and it can be shown that is at best filler and at worst misleading as to the actual difficulty of the theorems you are alluding to  Look I dont see why you need to be monkeying with this article why dont you write an article on Ores invariants of the additive polynomials or the moore determinant instead hell there is no entry for the vandermonde determinant even   or start the article on a carlitz module or drinfeld module instead or fix the article on nonarchimedean analysis which really needs a lot of work cause its missing all that jazz