Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Standard notation

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 redirect to Notation. I'll leave this as a redirect, but the content will be available in the history for any material that needs merging Fritzpoll (talk) 13:04, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Standard notation

Delete this has been unreferenced for over 2 years and has basically languished as something between a dictionary definition, a truism, and a point of view. This is not encyclopedic and is sufficiently general and not notable that English, French, Esperanto are all "standard notations" as are all the wiki definitions that we use here "nn", "cat", "redir", "afd" etc. Time to source this or retire it. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wikipedia is not a dictionary WP:DICTIONARY. 16x9 (talk) 23:45, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A pretty clear case of WP:NOTDIC, unlikely the article will amount to anything more. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 03:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wiktionary 76.66.193.90 (talk) 06:30, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Notation which seems to be a useful destination for someone wanting information on the topic. Colonel Warden (talk) 07:49, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Notation per Colonel Warden's suggestion of a merge. I think that the text of the article "Standard notation refers to a general agreement in the way things are written or denoted. The term is generally used in technical and scientific areas of study like mathematics standard notation is factors written with exponents for example:1,2,3,5,6,10,15,30, physics, chemistry and biology, but can also be seen in areas like business, economics and music." is implied by the much better notation article. It's a logical search term. Mandsford (talk) 16:48, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Notation. It's a reasonable article on this topic; its title is simpler (thus more likely to be searched for and less likely to be mis-typed); it's got what should be in such an article. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki then Redirect or change to Disambiguation page: I agree that this is a common enough term to not be an encyclopedia entry, but the current two non-list mainspace articles linking here refer to musical standard notation, and the other page lists it as a mathematical term, so either redirect to Musical notation or leave as a disambiguation defaulting to Notation, with specifics for Maths, Chess, Dice, etc -- all from an internal Wikipedia search: [1] Mark Hurd (talk) 02:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge to Notation. I added some mathematical external links. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 15:20, 1 March 2009 (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.