Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murray polygon

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 merge to Peano curve. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:46, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Murray polygon

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

Doesn't seem to be notable. Google Scholar gives only 7 results for "murray polygon", 3 of which are by the original creator. I've been unable to find any mention of this in any pop. lit. as well. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 23:12, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 23:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 23:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Peano curve (should yield a paragraph or so). The article even uses the illustration from Peano curve and boldy replaces "iteration of Peano curve construction" with "Murray polygon" - that nicely demonstrates the relationship, and the lack of a need for a separate article. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Both notable and significant. Andrew D. (talk) 17:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

...thank you for that immensely well-reasoned drive-by, I guess... --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:51, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Peano curve per the above. Scattered book and other scholarly references (e.g., [1][2][3]) are enough to support a description of the idea, but not really adequate for an article in its own right. And, often, setting a topic within the context of a more broad idea is pedagogically the better option anyway. XOR'easter (talk) 19:02, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: would be okay with the merge as suggested above. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 05:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Peano curve per above.Not enough discussed to warrant standalone article.Winged Blades^Godric 12:19, 21 January 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.