Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Near Root Algorithm: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:21, 1 October 2016

Latest revision as of 06:55, 7 February 2022

(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)

Line 13:

[[WP:N|Not notable]] - unable to find coverage in reliable sources. Probable vanity article. [[User:Cybercobra|Cybercobra]] ([[User talk:Cybercobra|talk]]) 13:45, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

*'''Delete'''. Unreferenced. Google Web returns zero results for [http://www.google.com/search?&as_eq=wikipedia&q=%22Near+Root+Algorithm%22 "Near Root Algorithm" -wiki]. — [[User:Rankiri|Rankiri]] ([[User talk:Rankiri|talk]]) 14:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Computing|list of Computing-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- [[User:Cybercobra|<b><font colorstyle="color:#3773A5;">Cyber</font></b><fontspan colorstyle="color:#FFB521;">cobra</fontspan>]] [[User talk:Cybercobra|(talk)]] 19:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)</small>

*'''Delete'''. Appears to be [[WP:OR|original research]]. I found nothing in Google scholar. We have coverage of similar material already at [[Integer square root]], but there seems to be nothing useful to merge into that article from here. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 22:34, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

**[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cybercobra&diff=307576112&oldid=307452266 OR confirmation] (albeit well-intentioned). --[[User:Cybercobra|<b><font colorstyle="color:#3773A5;">Cyber</font></b><fontspan colorstyle="color:#FFB521;">cobra</fontspan>]] [[User talk:Cybercobra|(talk)]] 04:10, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' - original research. [[User:Gandalf61|Gandalf61]] ([[User talk:Gandalf61|talk]]) 13:23, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' - Indeed looks like original research, I am also not familiar with the inventor (Nick Dietz). [[User:Materialscientist|Materialscientist]] ([[User talk:Materialscientist|talk]]) 08:12, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Line 23:

::Oh, hang on, now I see! The first part of the article is talking about the Babylonian method, but the second part (the main part of the article) isn't. Oops. Just ignore me ;)

::I can also verify that this has to be original research: it's useless. In order to approximate a square root, he has to calculate square roots, which kinda defeats the purpose of it all. Look at the conditions of the sums: they contain square roots! He's looking for a close 'square root', and using that to prime the iteration. Of course that works, but it totally defeats the purpose! --[[User:DanielPharos|DanielPharos]] ([[User talk:DanielPharos|talk]]) 21:38, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

{{#ifeq:{{#titleparts:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|2}}|Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log|{{collapse bottom}}|}}