Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Methods of computing cubic roots

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gauge00 (talk | contribs) at 20:21, 16 May 2010 (Methods of computing cubic roots: HOWTO sould not contain HOWTO's?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Methods of computing cubic roots (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no encyclopedic content here, just worked problems. No references are given. Delete per WP:NOTTEXTBOOK. RDBury (talk) 16:11, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete No encyclopedic content; WP:NOTHOWTO; individual methods already have their own articles. Gandalf61 (talk) 08:07, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment—Perhaps topic should be covered in general on nth root algorithm.—RJH (talk) 17:41, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to cube root and add anything new there. The article is encyclopedic as hell, to be sure, and I'm root-root-rooting for it, but we do have a policy here against "how to" articles (Quick how to-- Google "cube root(x)" -- it works. You're welcome.) And don't worry, Wikipedians-- this is about cube roots, not about Q*bert, the lovable little guy who hopped up and down those block-thingies (technical term "cubes"). Mandsford 19:23, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Funny to see that so many people said that wiki has policy against HOWTOs. But how can I imagine a page whose name is method of something COULD NOT contain howtos? And I am curious to know the Newton method is a kind of HOWTO's or not. Probably the height and weight of the name of Isaac Newton makes wikians not to dare to think the Newton method is not a HOWTOs.