- 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 of the debate was delete. Flowerparty☀ 04:40, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not encyclopedic. This is an implementation of the Sieve of Eratosthenes with an extremely overbroad article title. Even if it is moved to Wikisource, it still doesn't deserve to have this article title as a redirect.
- This nomination was made by Olathe at 03:08, May 29, 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Delete. While it is interesting to me . . . It is a description of specific algorithm that is not general enough to be of interest in itself. (Why is the {{disputed}} tag still there? It isn't needed anymore) Shenme 05:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Delete – per above – Gurch 11:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Original research. --LambiamTalk 11:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, unencyclopedic, original research. --Terence Ong 14:46, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete If this ever makes clear that this is the sieve of Eratosthenes, it's in the program (in a language I don't read). I see no point to keeping this; if there is an article to written here, better to start from scratch. Septentrionalis 18:51, 30 May 2006 (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.