Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1098 (number)

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. Paul August ☎ 05:19, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 1098 (number)

Says nothing other than how it is represented in different bases and what its factors are; no reason why this number should have its own page. Should be speediable under any number of criteria, but what the hell. sjorford →•← 11:00, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - otherwise this sets a precident for clogged up wikipedia with a infinite number of similiar articles. Markb 11:03, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, numbercruft. — JIP | Talk 11:04, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Articles listing a number, its divisors, and the numbers before and after it can be generated by the thousands (well, theoretically, they can be infinitely many). Not a notable number. Oleg Alexandrov 11:47, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
• Wikipedia is not infinite. This number does not satisfy the notability and inclusion criteria for numbers. Delete. Uncle G 12:26:27, 2005-08-12 (UTC)
• Delete, but Comment: I would really love to know why 1098 made the grade. Dmharvey Talk 12:37, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy delete - little or no context, and no information that isn't obvious from its title. Radiant_>|< 13:00, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Agree with Uncle G and Markb. Carbonite | Talk 13:08, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete with compliments to Uncle G for his well-written and referenced userspace page on "Wikipedia is not infinite". -Satori 17:16, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to 1000 (number) where the interesting aspects of this number are already mentioned. — RJH 19:10, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
  • I think you're confusing it with 1089, which does warrant its own page. sjorford →•← 08:11, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
  • With respect, redirect 1098 to 1000 is much like redirecting the US to the UK, they have no relation to one another! -Splash 15:23, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
• delete as per Oleg Alexandrov. --Tim Pope 19:16, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete there is nothing here to keep! -Splash 00:09, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete lol. I added it to the 1000 page, though. --Matt Yeager 04:27, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Silliness. linas 23:14, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per Oleg Alexandrov -- Arthur Rubin 22:25, 17 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.