Little publicity is given in mathematics to journal organization and maintaining correctness of the literature. However, worrisome policies of editorial handling and peer review are exercised in mathematical academia. They originate both from modern trends (like automatization) and from a traditionally and widely spread complacent and idle attitude in academic circuits.

This article displays such policies on the basis of specific instances and the reaction these practices lead to when issues about correctness of published mathematics are raised. It is drawn on concrete cases, which are crucial to understanding the cause of problems, and hence also possible approaches to solutions.

在数学方面很少宣传期刊组织和保持文献的正确性。然而，在数学学术界，编辑处理和同行评审的政策令人担忧。它们既源于现代趋势（如自动化），也源于学术圈中传统且广泛传播的自满和无所事事的态度。

本文根据具体实例展示此类政策，以及当提出有关已发表数学的正确性问题时这些做法导致的反应。它以具体案例为基础，这些案例对于理解问题的原因至关重要，因此也是解决问题的可能方法。