Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Batrachion

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:49, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Batrachion

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

This mathematical term seems to be used essentially by a single author (Pickover) and by definition is just a fancy name for a doubly infinite sequence. The list of examples provided consists of ordinary sequences except for the Blancmange curve which clearly isn't "a function defined for integers" and therefore has no business in the list anyways. Moreover the article is dangerously close to a copyright violation of its sources. Pichpich (talk) 01:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no proper definition and no evidence that this is notable terminology anwyay. Gandalf61 (talk) 15:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - article is about a specific mathematical term and is not unsourced. Notability is obvious. Novonium (talk) 19:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Preceding comment is by the author of the article. D.Lazard (talk) 21:47, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious? Why? Basically everyone in the math community would call this (and actually calls this) a doubly infinite sequence or, in the case of all correct examples you provided, a sequence. This is not a term in wide use by the mathematical community. Can you could explain how your definition differs from that of a doubly-infinite sequence? Pichpich (talk) 20:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Non notable and even fringe: In the 5 first pages of Scholar Google, only one article in English about the mathematical notion, authored by Pickover, cited only by himself and one (?) Chinese people writing in Chinese (except for the abstract). Also a few articles in Chinese that I am unable to read. D.Lazard (talk) 21:47, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – This article will leave any trained mathematician without prior knowledge, and more so any non-mathematician, in the dark as to what the topic is, aside from a broad classification. The intended meaning is evidently meant to be more specific than "a function over the integers", possibly with certain subjective properties. It is the very antithesis of "encyclopedic". — Quondum^☏ 21:54, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - One trained mathematician left in the dark here! I've looked at all the given examples and can find no criteria that distinguishes these from what is essentially "white noise". Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 22:45, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per above: I can't figure out what this article is trying to say. I've even published on some of the curves claimed to belong to this class. Perhaps there's some interesting relation or concept, but this is not it.linas (talk) 16:29, 17 August 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.