Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leviathan number

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:20, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Leviathan number (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This number seems to have no significance, and I don't think it deserves the coveted spot amongst the Large numbers D O N D E groovily Talk to me 12:39, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The article appears to lack the mathematical significance required by WP:NUMBER, and it also presents the false appearance of some veiled numerological significance. Sławomir Biały (talk) 11:17, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - although it's mentioned in one or two sources (I haven't checked the book), there's no evidence of why it's significant. Why is it based on 666, other than the fact that 666 is mentioned in the Bible? Even if 666 is significant, why (10^666)!, rather than say 10^(666!)? I can see the significance of numbers like Graham's number, another large number, as this is used in a proof of something, but this has no notability at all.  An optimist on the run! 12:07, 3 April 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.