Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of powers of two

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 redirect to Power of two#The 0th through 95th powers of two. Yunshui ^雲 _水 10:26, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of powers of two

[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)

Duplicative of Power of two#The 0th through 95th powers of two, which is better formatted, as well. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:53, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 June 4. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:04, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I used Twinkle. Could someone check the logs to see why it wasn't transcluded? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:04, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:11, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:11, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect, we certainly don't need two such articles. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:33, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. What are we? A calculator??? Ajf773 (talk) 09:25, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - Personally I find it ridiculous we have one article on this, we definitely don't need a lower quality second Nosebagbear (talk) 09:31, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I removed the list from Power of two per WP:NOTSTATS (and it was completely unsourced). Same for this article. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 10:07, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just a quick side note that such a table doesn't need to be sourced, per WP:CALC. As far as if it should be there at all, that's a tougher call, but a reasonably compact table is probably okay given that the entire article is about powers of two. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 11:42, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all above, of course. There goes my plan for List of powers of ten. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 11:45, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

. . . . and what about my list of powers of 1? Michael Hardy (talk) 19:28, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was my powers of 0 that really made them unhappy Nosebagbear (talk) 19:40, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the above. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:09, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Power_of_two#The_0th_through_95th_powers_of_two Vadder (talk) 19:46, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unnecessary duplication. No objection to a redirect but Powers of two already redirects to it so it is already unlikely that anybody searching for this would fail to find what they are looking for. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:14, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Power of two; it's a plausible enough search term, and redirects are cheap. XOR'easter (talk) 21:46, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Powers of two; redirects are cheap. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:35, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect non-notable. wumbolo ^^^ 13:33, 7 June 2018 (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.