Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/178 (number)


 * 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. ✗ plicit  00:18, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

178 (number)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Appears to fail WP:NNUM, as it only has 2 interesting mathematical properties listed.  interstatefive  (talk) - just another roadgeek 18:06, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions.  interstatefive  (talk) - just another roadgeek 18:06, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * 178 is the number of median graphs on nine vertices. Being palindromic in three consecutive bases (4546, 3437, 2628) might be considered interesting too.  If deleted, 178 would become the lowest integer without its own article.  Certes (talk) 18:49, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. Despite Articles for deletion/198 (number) and a recent remark I made on my talk page I'm not actually in favor of deleting most or all of our existing number articles. This is one that I already cleaned up and found enough properties that I thought were interesting to rescue it (the two in the article at the time of nomination). If I understood https://oeis.org/A061777 or https://oeis.org/A000650 clearly enough to summarize in a single sentence I would also have added them. Another is https://oeis.org/A053018 : it's one of the indexes of the smallest triple of dodecahedral numbers where one is the sum of the other two. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:32, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I think that between what's in the article now (slightly expanded since the nomination) and the other points mentioned above, this gets over the bar. The sequences in which it appears don't all lend themselves to brief verbal summary, but that's a challenge for writing, not grounds for deletion. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:51, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep – not the most exciting integer in the universe, but the expanded article just passes WP:NNUMBER and the presence of articles for all other numbers in the range tips the balance. Certes (talk) 21:08, 13 April 2022 (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.