Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Why 10 dimensions?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 merge and redirect to string theory. — TKD::Talk 03:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why 10 dimensions?

Why 10 dimensions? (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Reads like an essay so is not encyclopedic. It seems to aim at promoting the Hyperspace book, and the subject matter is better explored on the String theory page. h2g2bob (talk) 17:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete per WP:NOR. GreenJoe 18:57, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as unsourced originally researched content fork.-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 22:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge into string theory or something else that I don't understand, with a cite to the Hyperspace book. This does seem to come close to explaining multidimensional space, so it's not all bad. Mandsford 22:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge per Mandsford. --Bduke 03:22, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletions. -- Bduke 03:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge anything worth keeping with string theory. A separate Extra dimensions in string theory, split off from the main string theory article, might also be a good idea. --Starwed 06:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, then merge and redirect as necessary in the usual way. Yes, this article probably has some original research, and yes its encyclopedic tone is lacking, and yes the title is no good. But—and for what it's worth, this is my evaluation as a physicist—it has useful content that may contribute to other articles. This is a wiki, people! Use it that way! -- SCZenz 12:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. I agree exactly with SCZenz. The article has plenty of problems, but it also has valuable content that should not be deleted until someone has gotten around to working it into other articles.PhysPhD 19:11, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge into string theory. This is not to say that this should not be done in a deliberate fashion per SCZenz, but I cannot endorse this article's long-term retention in Wikipedia. --EMS | Talk 20:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge/Delete Anything useful can be merged into the String Theory (flag to some of the established contributors to the ST article to have a look and take what is useful), otherwise delete. We really can't have open-ended articles like this floating about - it isn't in an encyclopaedic style to have an article entitled "Why xyz?" - otherwise we will just have Why does the earth not fall into the Sun? or Why do cows moo? - we are an encyclo. not a Q&A site - that is what the helpdesks are for. That is me AGF - if I weren't to then I would say it was some viral marketing campaign for a catchphrase of a book and it should be deleted ASAP. SFC9394 19:16, 15 August 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.