Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dubner's conjecture

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:57, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dubner's conjecture

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This conjecture is not notable. There are no results at all for "Dubner's conjecture" in Google Scholar (the same search without quotes returns a variety of unrelated stuff), and the original paper by Harvey Dubner only has a grand total of three citations.

I made this article into a redirect to List of unsolved problems in mathematics#Prime numbers shortly after I came across it due to these issues, as well as due to the issue that most of the article was unsourced and could have well been original research. Some time later, OwenX restored it with the edit summary "likely non-notable" is not reason enough to get rid of a sourced article. Please take to AfD if you believe we're better off without this article. I still think that this conjecture is very non-notable, so I think we should still redirect it to List of unsolved problems in mathematics#Prime numbers as before. Duckmather (talk) 21:38, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Duckmather (talk) 21:38, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Thank you for bringing this here, Duckmather. I don't feel strongly about the article either way, although if changed to a redirect, a better target may be Goldbach's conjecture, where it is already mentioned in more detail than it is in List of unsolved problems in mathematics. Owen× ☎ 22:09, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete List of unsolved problems in mathematics is supposed to be for unsolved problems that have articles unto themselves, or at least problems about which there is a lot to say. Otherwise, it would balloon beyond all possibility of management. If this article shouldn't exist, then List of unsolved problems in mathematics shouldn't mention it. The term "Dubner's conjecture" is too obscure to even serve as a redirect. The basic idea isn't even due to Dubner. (To indicate the obscurity of the topic: Richard K. Guy's Unsolved Problems in Number Theory notes the existence of that paper (p. 107), but it doesn't discuss the paper's contents.) We can possibly say something about this at Goldbach's conjecture#Related problems, but the text currently there needs rewriting, and it shouldn't be called "Dubner's conjecture". XOR'easter (talk) 22:30, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think, having looked at who cites Dubner and Zwillinger, that XOR'easter has it right. This isn't an acknowledged named conjecture in its own right. Uncle G (talk) 15:53, 21 November 2023 (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.