Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Mathematical Formulas

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 of the debate was delete.

List of Mathematical Formulas

This is a list that merely lumps together and explains formulas that alread exist elsewhere on wikipedia. Whoever started it only placed a few on, but if it were to enumerate every formula in the same manner it would become huge, unworkable, and entirely composed of content that exists elsewhere on the site. Indrian 00:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. You're right about the article as it stands now, but what if was a more traditional Wikipedia list, and simply listed each Wikipedia article that's about a math formula? It would still be kind of odd, but then a lot of Wikipedia lists are. --Allen 00:32, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • That would depend. I am not against such lists in principle, but prefer categories to lists when feasible. If a list would be a better way to accomplish that than a category, then I would be fine with it. However, if no one changes this list to function in that manner I would still wanted it deleted, as the article as it stands has issues and it would be easy for someone else to create a proper list whether this article exists or not. Indrian 02:09, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Yeah, that makes sense. I can't see any reason this would be better as a list than as a category. --Allen 02:11, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a potentially infinite list. If no category exists for this sort of thing, one should be created. —
  UTC
• Delete. Nice idea, but purposeless. ~Kylu (u|t) 02:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As worthless --DV8 2XL 02:31, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete must be a repository of formulas. This can serve as a reminder note for the mathematical formulas, though. Funnybunny (^talk/_QRVS) 02:57, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Could we perhaps make a Category:Mathematical formulae? --M1ss1ontomars2k4 04:27, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, listcruft, a category will be good. --
  e Ong 04:47, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Weak Delete, the list would be good for Wikipedia (if a list of mathematical formulas does not fit in an encyclopaedia, I don't know where they could be placed), but as is, it is no use. If this were a list I would have suggested to move it all into Wikiversity. -- ReyBrujo 04:50, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. There can be useful lists on specific areas, and in fact there are, for example List of trigonometric identities and List of integrals of trigonometric functions, and there are even useful lists of lists: Lists of integrals and (less useful but not useless) List of mathematical identities. Although the present article is useless, it would actually be nice if Wikipedia had a "superlist" article on these repositories of mathematical formulas as a navigational aid to what the reader is looking for. A starting point for constructing this might be Category:Mathematics-related lists. --Lambiam^Talk 08:35, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete
  Wikipedia isn't a collection of information; mathematical formulae belong on the pages related to them, where they can actually be explained. A category of articles which explain math formulae, though, sounds like a good idea. Jude (talk,contribs,email) 09:05, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Curious. I'd say that Wikipedia is a collection of information. --Lambiam^Talk 09:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the correct quote is: "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information". --Tango 11:30, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A typing error, my apologies. Jude (talk,contribs,email) 23:07, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. DarthVader 09:06, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and create category —
  ets501^talk 12:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete and create category is a good idea. Kudos. --Tone 13:34, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – A category "mathematical formulas" is NOT a good idea. Mathematical formulas have only meaning within a context, which is given in the articles in which they are presented. Only very rarely will a formula be the focus of an article. It is pointless to have a category of articles that contain an important mathematical formula. Basically all mathematical articles do unless pure definitions or stubs. Without further organization, which is much better possible in articles like the aforementioned Lists of integrals than using a category, the effort will be useless and wasted. --Lambiam^Talk 18:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Giving it a second thought, you're right. There are really no articles that would consist only of formulas. Maybe on Wikisource but not here. --Tone 21:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment This would not be acceptable at Wikisource, please read the inclusion guidelines.--Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 23:42, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete --Osbus 18:35, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 21:07, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or Transwiki to Wikisource. All I see is a tiny list of geometrical formulas. Maybe some other article would see this as valuable, but this one needs to either be eliminated or go. -
  Tracker 21:32, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete I agree that a list seems to be unncessary and if all were included, it would be huge. Matterbug 22:20, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment on Wikisource: Please note that both the
  talk/_map) 23:43, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete and create category No need to have a long article for this. Buchanan-Hermit™..SCREAM!!!.... 23:48, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• If this had substance, it could go to Wikibooks. But I don't see why we should make them delete it. Septentrionalis 01:33, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I'd support some targeted formulae, but not an indescriminate list of all formulae. Ted 01:50, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, and do not create category. Lambiam^Talk 05:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- getcrunkjuice^contribs 19:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Wikipedia policy
  mandates that we nuke it from orbit. I don't think a category should be created, either. It is easy enough to search for something (eg. "distance formula", which redirects to distance). --Kooky (talk) 21:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete as nom. Beno1000 15:01, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.