Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Topic outline of algebra
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Neurolysis (talk | contribs) at 04:13, 15 January 2009 (Closing debate, result was keep). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 04:13, 15 January 2009 by Neurolysis (talk | contribs) (Closing debate, result was keep)
- 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. Per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) — neuro(talk) 04:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Topic outline of algebra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Also nominating: Topic outline of arithmetic, Topic outline of calculus, Topic outline of geometry, Topic outline of mathematics for same reasons.
These articles contain little information, and what information is there is mostly already either in the main articles algebra, arithmetic, calculus, geometry, mathematics or the portals portal:algebra, portal:geometry and portal:mathematics. Charvest (talk) 22:29, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep all. They're not really articles; they're navigational pages. As such they serve a useful role. Just because larger Wikipedia hasn't gotten around to creating a uniform standard for this sort of page is not a reason to delete it. --Trovatore (talk) 22:50, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Appropriate navigational pages. Pages similar to these get nominated from time to time, but t such pages are appropriate in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias have indexes.DGG (talk) 00:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep all — they're all navigational lists of topics. Remember that mathematics is very, very broad and goes waaaaaay beyond simple aspects that I assume we all know and take for granted. MuZemike 01:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - useful lists. Definitely encyclopedic. Matt (Talk) 03:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep all Very useful navigational pages. See Category:Outlines and Portal:Contents/Outline of knowledge —G716 <T·C> 04:04, 15 January 2009 (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.