And in this search, it's one thing to post links to a lot of people's work, and another to come up with your own proof. To point to someone else's work, instead of using your own origionality to get the point across, one must beg the question.. did god ever give anyone a brain to speak for themselves, or is everyone here nothing but a distant echo, a parrot repeating someone else's work?
If something is indeed a "proof" then it shouldn't matter the source. Especially in the case of abstract proofs, there is often a verifiable "best" answer which cannot be possibly be improved. If the source needs to be called into question, then it is either not actually proof at all, or the proof has been misunderstood.