Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrei's Powered-Base Rule

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. No harm done; many of us have newly-discovered algebraic identities in our younger days. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-05 09:03Z

[edit] Andrei's Powered-Base Rule

Andrei's Powered-Base Rule (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This page consists entirely of original research. Additionally, it was created by the creator of the alleged "rule", which violates the autobiography portion of the conflict-of-interest rules. Finally, it's not notable; there are literally an infinite number of "rules" that can be derived from algebra and some basic mathematical first principles, and there's nothing special about this one. Sarcasticidealist 00:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom - per the author's own admission, this is original research. Zetawoof^(ζ) 01:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
• Ditto. Loniousmonk 03:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: Despite the presentation, I am sure that this result, in correct, has been discovered and proved long ago. However, didn't we develop some kind of note or template to new authors whose first contribution was proposed for deletion, to explain the rules to them rather than just make them feel unwelcome? That would certainly be appropriate here. Newyorkbrad 03:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Response: Your suggestion to retain new users whose first contribution is AFD'd is a great one, and if no such note or template exists, somebody should design one. However, as to your comment about being sure that this "rule" has been discovered and proved long ago, it likely hasn't been just because nobody's bothered - the basic rules of mathematics are well understood, and finding new ways of making them interact with each other is generally just a waste of time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sarcasticidealist (talk • contribs) 08:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC).
  • There are e.g. Template:AFDWarning to inform an author about the AFD nomination of his article and Template:Firstarticle for new users referring to a first article nominated for any type fo deletion referring both to speedy deletion crtieria and WP:NOT. --Tikiwont 14:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete It's true, but naming it after a high schooler who supposedly (no way of verifying this) wrote it out for the first time is just silly. I remember discovering in grade school that (n + 1)² − n² = 2n + 1, does anybody propose we call this Veinor's identity? Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 21:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Veinor's point is well-taken, but let's not belittle the article-creator, either. Brad's Theorem was that the last digit of the fifth power of any (base-ten) integer is the same as the last digit of the integer. :) It seemed like a good idea at the time, and I am sure that if there had been a Wikipedia then I would have posted it, and been on the wrong end of this discussion. Newyorkbrad 21:10, 1 March 2007 (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.