Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Methods of computing cubic roots

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 speedy delete as the article's author requested deletion. — ξ ^xplicit 21:18, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Methods of computing cubic roots

(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 Wikipedia is not a place for how-tos. Kubek15 ^write/sign 17:40, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per WP:NOT#HOWTO. Joe Chill (talk) 18:48, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Actually all those methods are already on their respective pages. *sigh* WP:NOTHOWTO WP:CFORK--Savonneux (talk) 22:39, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and simplify, as there is already a Methods of computing square roots page with a (short) example. --Uncle Ed (talk) 23:04, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The Methods of computing square roots has a bunch of algorithms that are historically significant without their own pages. This page is just Newton's method and Shifting nth root algorithm for finding ${\sqrt[{3}]{x}}$ ${\sqrt[{3}]{x}}$ both of which apply to nth roots not just cubics. [Ed. I was referring to 'digit by digit' section here, author later copy pasted it from the other article.] --Savonneux (talk) 23:46, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Excellent point, Savonneux. If we keep the article, I'm planning to reduce it to a redirect -> Shifting_nth_root_algorithm#Paper-and-pencil_nth_roots, okay? --Uncle Ed (talk) 23:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yah that makes sense.--Savonneux (talk) 00:20, 16 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. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gauge00 (talk • contribs) 20:21, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete: Author has blanked page. ialsoagree (talk) 20:30, 16 May 2010 (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.