Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/138 (number): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
*'''Keep''' and allow for organic growth, this number apparently is worthy of note. --[[User:GRider|GRider]]\<sup>[[User_talk:GRider|talk]]</sup> 17:22, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' and allow for organic growth, this number apparently is worthy of note. --[[User:GRider|GRider]]\<sup>[[User_talk:GRider|talk]]</sup> 17:22, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete'''. I like the number articles normally, but there is absolutely nothing here of note. [[User:Gamaliel|Gamaliel]] 17:25, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC) |
*'''Delete'''. I like the number articles normally, but there is absolutely nothing here of note. [[User:Gamaliel|Gamaliel]] 17:25, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC) |
||
*'''Comment''' I think it is very likely that there actually '''is''' something ''genuinely'' interesting about the number 138, but... [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] [[User_talk:dpbsmith|(talk)]] 18:29, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Delete''' unless someone can articulate what it is prior to expiration of VfD. Original article is basically a joke/prank. We've had others, I forget the title but we had a self-instantiating version of Russell's paradox a while back. List of Wikipedia lists that do not include themselves or something. By the way, there is a "The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Numbers" by D. G. Wells, David Wells, that's been in print for quite some time, ISBN 0140261494, that's very good, but I gave my copy to a friend. Would be a good reference to consult if anyone's got time for a trip to the library. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] [[User_talk:dpbsmith|(talk)]] 18:29, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 18:29, 17 March 2005
This number is not notable because it is notable. Extreme delete. Thue | talk 14:44, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Ah, the good old interesting number paradox. Delete unless anything more can be said. sjorford →•← 15:47, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Proof that all integers are interesting (and should be kept?):
- 1 is intersting and notable, OK
- Assume k is interesting and notable, need to prove that k+1 is interesting and notable.
- If n is interesting and notable, then n+1 is interesting and notable for being one higher than an interesting and notable number.
- So k+1 is interesting and notable.
- By principle of induction all numbers are interesting and notable, but we do not have space for that unfortunately.
- Conclusion: This article should be deleted. Sjakkalle 08:26, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- If this is redone so its along the same lines as 137, I'll vote to keep. There has to be a cut off somewhere, but 138 seems a bit too arbitrary to me. I assume there is a wikiproject for these integer articles, and that would be the best place to discuss where the consecutive numbers should end and where they should start doing only more significant numbers. -R. fiend 15:53, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and allow for organic growth, this number apparently is worthy of note. --GRider\talk 17:22, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. I like the number articles normally, but there is absolutely nothing here of note. Gamaliel 17:25, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Comment I think it is very likely that there actually is something genuinely interesting about the number 138, but... Dpbsmith (talk) 18:29, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete unless someone can articulate what it is prior to expiration of VfD. Original article is basically a joke/prank. We've had others, I forget the title but we had a self-instantiating version of Russell's paradox a while back. List of Wikipedia lists that do not include themselves or something. By the way, there is a "The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Numbers" by D. G. Wells, David Wells, that's been in print for quite some time, ISBN 0140261494, that's very good, but I gave my copy to a friend. Would be a good reference to consult if anyone's got time for a trip to the library. Dpbsmith (talk) 18:29, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)