Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thaha Hussain's clock-work formula

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. Singu larity 08:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thaha Hussain's clock-work formula

Wikipedia is not a how-to manual; and this formula is elementary mathematics, not worth an encyclopedia article. JohnCD (talk) 22:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Trivial application of trigonometry. All online usages of the term appear to be directly connected to Hussain. Zetawoof_(ζ) 22:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and above Hobbeslover ^{talk/contribs} 23:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per above; it's not a standard name, for something that's trivial trigonometry. (And, uh, PI /= 3.14159, and is probably stored in a standard header for whatever programming language you use, to much higher accuracy.)--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all above, WP:SNOW, and probably a speedy category too. Mr. Scienceuncle, thank you for contributing this creation, but I must tell you that Wikipedia is not a collection of source codes, so Wikipedia is not the best place to contribute articles of this kind. And if you could, please, do not erase the comments of others, as that does not help. You can move this page to a name like "User:Scienceuncle/Clockwork" and it will probably be better off there. Then read links like WP:NOT and learn about how Wikipedians work around here. John J. Bulten (talk) 19:57, 24 March 2008 (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.