Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beatles Concert Puzzle

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 keep. Article improved, nom withdrawn Mr.Z-man 01:17, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Beatles Concert Puzzle

Beatles Concert Puzzle (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

No sources, no evidence of notability. Oren0 (talk) 06:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. This is a well-known mathematical puzzle but it has no inherent connection to the Beatles or a concert; that's just what someone named it for a single variant version. "Beatles Concert Puzzle" is not even a well-known name for it; it garners no Google hits outside Wikipedia and its mirrors. I could conceive of the mathematical content (with the Beatle-related content removed) going into an article about logic puzzles, but the current version should be deleted. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep as rewritten and renamed. Good work by Soxred. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:12, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
• Move to Bridge and torch problem, source, and expand. The general version of this (N crossers) is studied as a routing problem, while the version in the article is just the most well-known example (modulo the Beatles setting). I'm working on sources at the moment. In particular, there is a 2002 survey article by Rote, and I could've sworn I ran across the problem in EWD. Michael Slone (talk) 15:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
• Comment - I have just moved, expanded, sourced, removed Beatles entry, essentialy rewrote it. Please relook over it, to see if it is still should be deleted. Soxred93 | talk count bot 16:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
• As original nom, change to Keep based on work done by User:Soxred93. Now that it has sources and seems to be written in a way that's reasonable, I think it can stay. Oren0 (talk) 18:28, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

  Is that a withdrawal? Soxred93 | talk count bot 19:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC

• Yes. Does that end the AfD given that there's still a delete vote? I don't know what happens at this point. Oren0 (talk) 21:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep, probably speedy keep as it is now a redirect to a different sourced article. Best if Metropolitan90 agrees before closure per WP:SK. --Dhartung | Talk 21:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

  Comment - Yes, it is a redirect, but the article we are talking about is the redirect target. It was moved in an effort to keep it. Soxred93 | talk count bot 23:01, 5 February 2008 (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.