Editing Counterexamples in Topology (section)

==Reviews==
In her review of the first edition, [[Mary Ellen Rudin]] wrote:
:In other mathematical fields one restricts one's problem by requiring that the [[topological space|space]] be [[Hausdorff space|Hausdorff]] or [[paracompact]] or [[metric space|metric]], and usually one doesn't really care which, so long as the restriction is strong enough to avoid  this dense forest of counterexamples. A usable map of the forest is a fine thing...<ref>{{cite journal | first=Mary Ellen | last=Rudin | year=1971 | title=Review: ''Counterexamples in Topology'' | journal=[[American Mathematical Monthly]] | doi=10.2307/2318037 | volume=78 | issue=7 | pages=803–804 | jstor=2318037 | mr=1536430}}</ref>
In his submission<ref>C. Wayne Patty (1971) "Review: ''Counterexamples in Topology''", {{MR|id=0266131}}</ref> to [[Mathematical Reviews]] C. Wayne Patty wrote:
:...the book is extremely useful, and the general topology student will no doubt find it very valuable. In addition it is very well written.
When the second edition appeared in 1978 its review in [[Advances in Mathematics]] treated topology as territory to be explored:
:[[Henri Lebesgue|Lebesgue]] once said that every mathematician should be something of a [[Naturalism_(philosophy)|naturalist]].  This book, the updated journal of a continuing expedition to the never-never land of general topology, should appeal to the latent naturalist in every mathematician.<ref>{{cite journal | first1=Joseph | last1=Kung | first2=Gian-Carlo | last2=Rota | authorlink2=Gian-Carlo Rota | year=1979 | title=Review: ''Counterexamples in Topology'' | journal=[[Advances in Mathematics]] | volume=32 | issue=1 | pages=81 | doi=10.1016/0001-8708(79)90031-8 | doi-access=free}}</ref>