Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/-0


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Keep. Physchim62 14:58, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

-0

 * Delete Hoax Nonsense StephenJMuir 20:09, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep This page has not been expanded: it has been completely replaced. It was originally an article on -0 in the field of mathematics, in which -0 is and always will be equal to +0. It is now an article on -0 in the field of computing, which is perfectly valid. StephenJMuir 10:07, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Keep per rewrite and link provided by User:Pilatus. Good work all on sourcing this and writing a useable article on the topic.--Isotope23 20:38, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. What? the wub  "?!"  22:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC) Keep per Pilatus. the wub   "?!"  09:28, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete . NatusRoma 05:28, 15 October 2005 (UTC) Keep per User:Pilatus. NatusRoma 03:08, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete this wasn't speedy deleted because??? Masterhatch 10:26, 15 October 2005 (UTC) With the added info and sources, I change my vote to Keep. Masterhatch 03:43, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. THIS IS NOT A HOAX as a this link will tell! Negative zeroes do occur in one's complement arithmetic. Pilatus 00:49, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Kappa 01:42, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is no negative zero. There may be a position in computer memory that is used to indicate the sign in non-zero numbers. A bitstring in a computer may be the same as zero except for that position. That does not make it negative zero. A more sensible use for that bitstring would actually be undefined value. &minus;Woodstone 12:48, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article needs more work, and it should be noted that the -0 is usually a PITA, and one reason why 2's complement is preferred. -- Egil 13:01, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, 2's complement has its problems too. For example, an 8 bit 2's complement number has values in the range -128 thru +127. If you evaluate -(-128) you get -128 rather than +128! StephenJMuir 14:39, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually what you get is overflow; up to you to interpret the validity and value of the result. &minus;Woodstone 15:54, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. The concept of negative zero indeed exists in many floating point representations. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 15:02, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. John Walker even dedicated a whole page to this subject. squell 05:11, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. The current page is completely different from the one nominated, and is now a valuable contribution to Wikipedia.-gadfium 20:06, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as above, possibly expand beyond computing. The original article didn't make too much sense, but it contained an apparent allusion to the temperature of -0 in statistical mechanics, which would be an interesting thing to discuss in the article. --Trovatore 20:33, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep PrimeFan 20:42, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Itz 4 realz yo. It belongs in Category:Computer arithmetic, where there are many other weird applications, approximations, and abstractions of mathematical concepts. It is even referenced in W3C standards . Current article text is looking OK. &mdash; mjb 01:39, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to 0 (number) - Bwfc 20:29, 19 October 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.