Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/65539 (number)

65539 (number)

65539 (number) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Contested prod. Per WP:NUMBER, articles on numbers over 1000 are discouraged unless they have three interesting properties, which are also fairly rare. We do not, for example, have articles on every prime; we have a list of primes.

Delete Four properties are claimed here.

1. is arbitrary; this is a Fermat prime +2; every number is a Fermat prime + something.
2. , the twin prime, really adds little to (1). Between them they amount to one, (maybe 1.5) interesting property.
3. is trivial; given Goldbach's conjecture, it amounts to 65539 has digits which sum to an even number less a hundred trillion; half of all the numbers which are not too long to be page titles.
4. is numerology. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:19, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

• Delete — Interesting properties for 5-digit numbers can be listed on 10000 (number). But these all look rather trivial. — RJH (talk) 17:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Every large number is special in several trivial ways. Edison 17:41, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NUMBER - not nearly special enough Blueboar 17:45, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete because none of the items is particularly special. YechielMan 18:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete violates WP:NUMBER, not special enough to deserve an article Hut 8.5 19:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, even if it is over 9000. =^_^= Fascinating notes, but too arbitrary. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete garners a great big "So what". JuJube 21:30, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. It's worth pointing out that we don't have a separate article on 65536 (it redirects to 10000 (number)), even though that figure is far more important, especially in the computing field. *** Crotalus *** 22:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
• Delete because Interesting number paradox isn't a policy =). cab 00:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)