Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/7734 (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 of the debate was DELETE. Mo0[talk] 17:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 7734 (number)

Non-notable number according to these guidelines. (Strange that I found this one on 6/6/6...) Crystallina 03:09, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

• No vote Somehow I have a feeling that there are enough culteral references out there to make it work...--SeizureDog 03:12, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Fails to meet logical restricions set by above link. Adambiswanger1 03:14, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nomination. I admit that I find most of these articles on number kind of baffling, but I'm willing to accept that a lot of them have some kind of a point to them. That said, when when the content is just "7734 is the number that comes before 7735 and comes after 7733" and some pointless "caculator fun", it looks entirely clear-cut to me... -- Captain Disdain 03:15, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. But, I'm gonna use this number the next time I play the lottery! Wish me luck! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 04:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete original research. I fail to see the connection with 666. CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 04:22, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete although I did actually know about that number :) —Mets501^talk 07:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. original research, nn number. --Terence Ong 08:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. The connection with 666 is simply that when typed into a calculator and turned upside down, it spells hELL. Slightly amusing, but not notable. JIP | Talk 08:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
  • That's not really a connection, though; fun with calculators vs. a number of Biblical significance. CanadianCaesar Cæsar is turn’d to hear 19:08, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
    • I know, but it's the closest thing the article gets to a connection. JIP | Talk 05:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable. --Coredesat 09:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Only one fun fact which is more to do with how we choose to write the number, rather than any real mathematical or cultural propery. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. nn-numbercruft. (Note that I didn't call 230, 240, or 270 that.) One (marginally) culturally interesting property. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 22:02, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete — But I got a chuckle out of "caculator". — RJH (talk) 23:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to Stupid calculator tricks, along with 58008 132.205.45.148 19:35, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete fails to meet the guidlines for number articles. Eluchil404 05:01, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

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.