Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How to specify a function

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 merge. W.marsh 16:30, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How to specify a function

Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. --ScienceApologist 14:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:20, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Obvious keep. Not the best article, but the only thing that's non-encyclopedic about it is the title. It's not a how-to page, it's the beginning of a taxonomy that could become a reasonable subpage of function (expanding on the "Signifying functions" section).

Monicasdude 14:35, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

There is already a section in Function (mathematics) about specifying a function. This article, with or without the bad title, is essentially a 'how to'. PJM 15:19, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

• Move to Function specification Ruby 15:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. --Terence Ong 15:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Merge with Function (mathematics). RJFJR 16:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Merge any usable content (this is not my field) per RJFJR. Delete as unencyclopedic "how-to". -- Krash (Talk) 16:04, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Move to Function specification or Merge into Function (mathematics), per above. --James S. 16:24, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete; a big poorly-organized lump of stuff. The distinction between extensional and intensional functions is important but not clearly explained here. Some of the ideas probably should be merged into function (mathematics), but I see no need to merge any of the text (meaning we don't have to preserve the history for GFDL), and the title is unfindable and so there's not much point in making it a redirect. --Trovatore 06:31, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Trovatore Arthur Rubin | (talk) 22:43, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment so on reflection I'm not so sure it's really cricket to merge ideas without giving credit (even if it's technically allowed by GFDL and copyright law. Maybe smerge? --Trovatore 01:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete How to guides are for wikibooks Gerard Foley 21:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
• Merge content into Function (mathematics) and delete article, as I don't believe the title is a useful link. Despite others proclaiming this is a how-to article, it doesn't actually tell you how to specify a function. It explains how functions often are specified and most of this is in the function article. --Chan-Ho (Talk) 12:21, 18 February 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.