Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prisoners and hats puzzle
Appearance
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 16:31, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
- Prisoners and hats puzzle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Messy fancruft. Mr. Guye (talk) 10:17, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
- Keep "AFD is not clean-up" - The subject is serious Game theory, not "messy fancruft". This puzzle features in a Masters degree thesis from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln - [1] - and in class notes from a mathematics course at Stanford University - [2] - as well as various text books and study guides for subjects ranging from economics to psychology - [3] - WP:WikiProject Game theory and WP:WikiProject Mathematics should be notified of this AFD. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 04:34, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
- Keep per Dodger67. A bit of searching shows that topic clearly meets GNG. But the article also clearly needs to be cleaned up. The addition of sources would be nice. -Thibbs (talk) 12:30, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
- Keep- I agree with Dodger67, subject seems to be notable.Ireneshih (talk) 14:34, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.