Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wieferich@Home
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 delete. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:53, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Wieferich@Home (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable project. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 18:20, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:05, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:05, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I found virtually nothing to argue for notability of this project. I found potential source (though I have no access to the text and thus don't know whether the project is indeed mentioned there):
- Mossinghoff, Michael J. (2009), "Wieferich pairs and Barker sequences" (PDF), Designs, Codes and Cryptography, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 149–163, doi:10.1007/s10623-009-9301-3
- Though I'm not opposed to deletion,
I would propose selective merge to either Wieferich prime (main subject of software itself) or Folding@Home (already lists several projects it influenced, and this one is obviously one of them). Such merge would help to collect independent reliable sources on this project in case those appear (or in case I missed some) — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 13:25, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]- The text of the article you mention is available online here. The project is indeed mentioned in the paper in one sentence which says "Knauer and Richstein [16] recently completed a search for p < 1.25 x 1015 for this case, and a distributed computing project [32] now seeks to extend this bound." The only other credible source mentioning this project I am aware of is the paper published by the project authors (available online here). I don't think this is enough for a standalone article, nor is there anything worth merging into Wieferich prime. The most important stuff from the paper by the project authors is already in the article and any details about the project itself mentioned in the paper are not relevant to the Wieferich prime article. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 14:07, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I was thinking of something as brief as "Wieferich@Home distributed computing project was settled with a goal of searching for Wieferich primes; As of August 2012[update] it found one previously unknown number." — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 14:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- This information is already included at Wieferich prime#History and search status. The published achievements from the paper of the project authors are mentioned at Wieferich prime#Binary periodicity of p−1. Apart from that, the project has found nothing that is worth mentioning so far. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 15:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I didn't notice that. Then just delete. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 15:17, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- This information is already included at Wieferich prime#History and search status. The published achievements from the paper of the project authors are mentioned at Wieferich prime#Binary periodicity of p−1. Apart from that, the project has found nothing that is worth mentioning so far. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 15:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I was thinking of something as brief as "Wieferich@Home distributed computing project was settled with a goal of searching for Wieferich primes; As of August 2012[update] it found one previously unknown number." — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 14:56, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The text of the article you mention is available online here. The project is indeed mentioned in the paper in one sentence which says "Knauer and Richstein [16] recently completed a search for p < 1.25 x 1015 for this case, and a distributed computing project [32] now seeks to extend this bound." The only other credible source mentioning this project I am aware of is the paper published by the project authors (available online here). I don't think this is enough for a standalone article, nor is there anything worth merging into Wieferich prime. The most important stuff from the paper by the project authors is already in the article and any details about the project itself mentioned in the paper are not relevant to the Wieferich prime article. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 14:07, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:GNG. However, I think that this recent ref addition should be included at Wieferich prime. -- Trevj (talk) 10:45, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Both references are already included in Wieferich prime, see refs no. 9 and 12. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 12:18, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. Sorry I missed those. -- Trevj (talk) 13:43, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Both references are already included in Wieferich prime, see refs no. 9 and 12. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 12:18, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I can't find sufficient independent significant coverage to demonstrate notability PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 02:51, 11 August 2012 (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.