In the last few days I solved some problems from Polya-Sego's book but right now I think that the formulation of some problems is slightly confusing and nonstandard. That is why I am opening this post and want to clarify some moments.
Question 1.
Suppose that $A_n$ are partial sums of series $\sum \limits_{n=1}^{\infty}a_n$ and $l=\liminf \limits_{n\to \infty}A_n, \ L=\limsup \limits_{n\to \infty}A_n$.
Then we have to show $\{A_n:n\in \mathbb{N}\}$ is everywhere dense in $[l,L]$, right? But usually when we trying to prove that $A$ is dense in $X$ we mean that $A\subset X$, right?
But here some elements of $\{A_n: n\in \mathbb{N}\}$ may be outside of $[l,L]$. And it seems to me a bit confusing.
Question 2.
The phrasing of this question is vague.
Is the limit point of a sequence same as limit point of set? In other words, $p$ is a limit point of a sequence $\{t_n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ if for any $\epsilon>0$ one can find $t_N$ such that $0<|t_N-p|<\epsilon$, right?
If we take $\nu_n=n$ then $\dfrac{\nu_n}{n+\nu_n}=\frac{1}{2}$ and we see that the limit point of that sequence is empty.
So I would be very happy if someone can clarify my thoughts, please.


"A is dense in X" means that $\overline{A} = X$. The closure of A is X. An equivalent statement is "for all $\epsilon > 0$, and $x \in X$, there exists a $a \in A$ such that $|x - a| < \epsilon$". Here, a depends on $\epsilon$ and $x$.
How many $A_{n}$ can lies outside of $[l,L]$?
$x$ is a limit point of the set A if for every neighborhood of x contains an ement of A that is not x. Notice how a limit point is defined for a set as opposed to a sequence. It make sense to talk about cluster points of sequences. The set ${1}$ has no limit point in $\mathbb{R}$ but the sequence $(1/2)_{n \geq 1}$ has a cluster point $1$.