Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Infinite precision arithmetic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cleared as filed (talk | contribs) at 03:15, 10 November 2005 (reattribution of edit due to name change). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 03:15, 10 November 2005 by Cleared as filed (talk | contribs) (reattribution of edit due to name change)
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was redirect to Arbitrary precision. -- BDAbramson talk 20:20, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
Quite difficult to form an opinion based upon what currently exist. However this turns up very little, and Wolfram has nothing.
brenneman(t)(c) 02:58, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Even if the subject itself has any merit, this article certainly has none. —Cleared as filed. 05:51, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
Keep. The subject is a minor, but notable corner of computer science. The external link which I found - [1] - is what this article should be. -- RHaworth 09:38, 2005 July 13 (UTC)- Delete content, list on requested articles. Radiant_>|< 13:07, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
- Subject is notable, but as has been said, the content is essentially meaningless.
Delete unless significantly cleaned up.Redirect to Arbitrary precision, whichI have a bit of experience in this area, soI might cleanitup myself. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 13:53, July 13, 2005 (UTC) - Merge and redirect to Arbitrary precision, the more common name for this concept. Both are rather dismal, though. -- Plutor 14:27, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Arbitrary precision. There is nothing to merge. -- RHaworth 15:57, 2005 July 13 (UTC)
- Redirect as per RHaworth. Redundant topic. Darksidex 17:36, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect, although that other article sucks too. Grue 21:24, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect. Article as it stands now is nonsensical yammering. ~ WCFrancis 00:11, 14 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.