Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Continuous quantum computation: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
XOR'easter (talk | contribs) →Continuous quantum computation: reply to comment |
XOR'easter (talk | contribs) m →Continuous quantum computation: forgot to indent |
||
Line 17:
:::Having gone over the article again, editing it for encyclopedic tone and so forth, I think the best course of action would either be to '''move''' it to something like "Quantum computation of continuous functions", or to '''merge''' it into an appropriate article (like [[quantum computation]], as suggested above). There does appear to be a legitimate literature on this general area, but the current name for the article is quite confusing, and it is possible that there simply isn't enough article here to stand on its own. [[User:XOR'easter|XOR'easter]] ([[User talk:XOR'easter|talk]]) 21:14, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
::::I tend to agree with your colleagues, and the editors who added the paper you mention, that I would have associated the title with the continuous variables rather than the- actually slightly nebulous idea- of computation of continuous functions, so I would definitely agree that the page should be moved to a more appropriate title if kept. I agree that there is literature on this point, but I'm questioning whether or not it's a useful distinction- to make a slightly frivolous illustration it seems a little like having an article called "Scientists whose names contain only letters from the first half of the alphabet". It contains noteworthy subjects but the classification isn't itself of much note. Thank you for your work improving the article- even if the consensus is for deletion I think we can merge some of this content into [[quantum computation]]. [[User:Porphyro|Porphyro]] ([[User talk:Porphyro|talk]]) 09:09, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
:::::'''Reply to comment''' – I generally agree that the separation of this corner from the rest of the field is rather arbitrary. In order to facilitate an eventual merge (which looks more and more like the best way to go), I've inlined the citations, matching the papers with their subjects. (Current total, including some I found during the process: 16 citations, by 11 authors.) [[User:XOR'easter|XOR'easter]] ([[User talk:XOR'easter|talk]]) 16:35, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' this appears to be the [[research program]] of a single academic; without any notable results the program itself is not notable. As a "generic term" the article is low-quality and should be deleted as [[WP:TNT]]. [[User:Power~enwiki|Power~enwiki]] ([[User talk:Power~enwiki|talk]]) 23:32, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
| |||