- 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 speedy keep. The author only edits was to take two articles (this one and Quasi-Hopf algebra) to AfD with no proper reasoning. The article is clearly going to be kept. Probably related to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spherical model and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rodney J. Baxter. – Jitse Niesen (talk) 11:28, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
nn concept.Mathguru 06:28, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep (author bias) - I can't see why they aren't noticeable, quite a few books have this stuff.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 06:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep. scholar.google.com reports this as being a notable (albeit esoteric) branch of mathematics. -- GWO
- Comment. Mathguru is a new user, and these nominations are his/her first edits. Speedy keep?-- GWO
- Comment- If it's a speedy keep, it's only because it's clear what the consensus is going to be, not because this is a new user. I'm not going to assume these are bad-faith edits. Reyk YO! 08:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - if someone's first edit is an AfD (of a non-obvious nature), I think one may deduce bad faith. -- GWO
- Comment- You are probably right. The fact that a supposed newbie uses terms like "nn" is suspicious to say the least. But that's not the point. If you're going to get the consensus you want without having to assume bad faith, why would you? Reyk YO! 11:14, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - if someone's first edit is an AfD (of a non-obvious nature), I think one may deduce bad faith. -- GWO
- Comment- If it's a speedy keep, it's only because it's clear what the consensus is going to be, not because this is a new user. I'm not going to assume these are bad-faith edits. Reyk YO! 08:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Mathguru is a new user, and these nominations are his/her first edits. Speedy keep?-- GWO
- Keep. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 07:28, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep. --LambiamTalk 07:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep- It's notable and sourced. Good enough for me. But as with the related article above, it's a bit technical for the average reader. Reyk YO! 08:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- KeepHopf algebras are an important area of research. Wikipedia can and should have research level topics (compliant with NOR, of course). This may be irreparably technical; that is OK. -lethe talk + 10:46, 26 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.