Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Mathematics

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Mathematics. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Mathematics|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Mathematics. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Mathematics/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Mathematics

Professor Dave Explains

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poorly sourced article that was moved from draftspace into mainspace. A before search returns mostly sources from one site (evolution news). I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 00:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Internet. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 00:10, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Education, Science, Biology, Mathematics, California, and Minnesota. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No evidence of notability. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:02, 21 October 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Delete The only credible source is an interview, which is not an independent source. References to significant coverage in several reliable sources completely independent of Professor Dave are required. Cullen328 (talk) 05:40, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Kablammo (talk) 10:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No evidence of notability and doesn’t meet Wp:GNG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hackesan (talk • contribs) 11:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Evolution News is a Discovery Institute rag that counts for nothing. Creationists complaining about a scientist don't contribute to that scientist's notability, unless something quite unusual happens and reliable sources actually cover the incident in depth. That said, I could be convinced of a WP:PROF#C7 pass; the evidence isn't solid so far (see for example this), but that would be the way to go. XOR'easter (talk) 21:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Transforms in Digital Signal Processing

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested draftification. Not enough sources given to support GNG as a group, and the article reads more like a class listing various methods and algorithms (each already detailed in their own article) rather than an encyclopedic treatment of integral transforms in signal processing as a whole. A WP:BEFORE brings up more sources (e.g. [1], [2]), but they are all "how-to" books about applying transform algorithms to signal processing, rather than about a specific concept: Wikipedia shouldn't have every conceivable "Using X in Y" article. Likely doesn't work as a list either, being a vaguely defined subset of List of transforms. All in all, discussing this subtopic in Integral transform (and the individual transforms in their respective pages) would likely work better than this hybrid how-to/article. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Mathematics. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of convex regular-faced polyhedra

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The list may seem to be redundant, consisted of convex polyhedron's classes in the following: we have five Platonic solids list, we have Archimedean solid and Catalan solid's list, and we have Johnson solids list. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 00:43, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 October 6. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:10, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mathematics and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:38, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Quite obviously it meets WP:NLIST (see e.g. [3], [4], [5]) and the fact that we have articles on subsets of these objects does not mean it is 'redundant', no more than a list of countries is redundant by the fact we have articles on the individual countries.--cyclopia ^speak! 16:24, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cyclopia If that's the case, how to rearrange the table in an encyclopediac way? The list apparently does not mention the background of how can convex polyhedrons be defined, rather adds a table by marking each of the cells whether they have such specific properties. If the article lists all of the types of solids, then the list describing the specific solids may also be redundant to create. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 08:47, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete probably. This is essentially redundant to List of Johnson solids, which is better. The only main difference is that this one also includes the regular and uniform polyhedra (including extra entries for specific cases of prisms and antiprisms), which as the other list notes, are sometimes excluded from being called "Johnson solids". Having a whole separate article just to address a difference in naming convention seems unneeded. Maybe there's a better solution here, but this list isn't it. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:04, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That seems like a better argument for either Merge or Redirect than delete. McYeee (talk) 22:03, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to an appropriate article. It’s great information, but not covered in any significant way. Can we rescue this table? Bearian (talk) 18:22, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The fact there are infinitely many convex polyhedron, so adding more in this table is pretty useless and damaging audience computer. There are too many charateristics on specific detail whether they are belonging to this class polyhedron or not, and the table is completely unfinished yet. Pyramids and bipyramids has infinitely many. Prisms and antiprisms has infinitely many. Platonic has five. Archimedean and Catalan solids has thirteen. Johnson solids has ninety-two. Deltahedron has eight. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 01:56, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. We have editors arguing for Delete, Keep and Merge (but with no target article mentioned). More discussion is needed is come to a consensus. If you suggest a Redirect or Merge, please include a target article as well.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:43, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a poor replica of List of Johnson solids. If the cross-reference information with, say, Archimedean solid needs to be preserved, a column "Also part of" can be added to the table. --Викидим (talk) 07:17, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of Johnson solids: of which this is essentially a lower-quality duplicate. Owen× ☎ 16:36, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding me? Johnson solids are part of convex polyhedron! Really??!! Dedhert.Jr (talk) 17:04, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Johnson solids are indeed a proper subset of convex polyhedra. Specifically, they are the subset of convex polyhedra that are regular-faced, which is what this list is. By definition, there is no convex regular-faced polyhedron that isn't a Johnson solid, making the two sets identical. Owen× ☎ 18:13, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. That makes sense right now. My apologies. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 00:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Owen× ☎ 01:54, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: OwenX's argument looks pretty definitive to me, does anyone else agree?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 19:13, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Technically, some (not all!) authors prefer to explicitly exclude the Platonic solids and Archimedean solids from the Johnson set, see [6]. This distinction is already covered in the Johnson solids. There are also infinite sets (say, prisms) that are naturally excluded from any such list. That said, I agree with OwenX. --Викидим (talk) 20:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per OwenX. Polyamorph (talk) 07:33, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect I will also join the agree-with-OwenX party. XOR'easter (talk) 21:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematics proposed deletions

Irreversible circuit (via WP:PROD on 15 October 2024)

Mathematics miscellany for deletion

Mathematics redirects for discussion