Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1984 (number)

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further 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 Delete. Redwolf24 00:18, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

1984 (number)
Contains nothing that couldn't be said about ANY other number. Either needs something notable adding about this number (as a number), or a bot to create a couple of thousand other pages... 62.173.111.114 12:53, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. If I'm not mistaken, I think the WikiProject Numbers want articles on all integers up to and including 256. This number is not particularily interesting. Sjakkalle (Check!)  15:06, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Seriously? Every integer up to 256?  That's ridiculous.  And why 256?  Just because it's 2^8?  I fear the 257 fans will be most upset.  Oh, delete this.  1984 is notable as a year, and as the title of a book, but not in itself as a number. Proto t c 15:17, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 256 is not the upper bound used in the notability and inclusion criteria. See User:Uncle G/Wikipedia is not infinite. Uncle G 15:38:17, 2005-08-16 (UTC)
 * Merge/Redirect anything of interest back to 1000 (number), where this number is mentioned. &mdash; RJH 15:27, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * That'll be easy, since there's nothing of interest there to merge back. Delete, and fix 1984 (disambiguation) to point to 1000 (number) (or unlink). Hv 16:15, 16 August 2005 (UTC)


 * I vaguely remember a story about Erdos (or was it someone else), who would never describe a number as uninteresting. Given any number he would immediately rattle off some bizarre (and unique) propery of the number.  Unfortunately, I have nowhere near the powers of Erdos, and this number is utterly uninteresting, Delete. --stochata 16:02, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The anecdote is given in 1729 (number) Bluap 10:38, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. What the article has to relate about 1984 is not written in the Book. Pilatus 16:47, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not interesting enough. We have to draw the line somewhere. I agree with the sentiments expressed in User:Uncle G/Wikipedia is not infinite, mentioned above. &mdash; Paul August ☎ 16:49, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * delete I'm certain that most people who type "1984" are either looking for the book or the year. The Bearded One 17:06, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Uncle G. Oleg Alexandrov 17:09, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, wikiproject numbers has a pretty good, though not perfect, system, and this doesn't fall into it. I think the idea about no uninteresting numbers is "proved" false because some number would be interesting for being the smallest uninteresting number, making it interesting, and so on up the scale to infinity. Obviously wikipedia is going to cut off consecutive integers at some point and 256, as a power of 2, is as good as any, I guess. -R. fiend 17:53, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I would vote "keep" for anything up to about 1980, but 1984 is just taking things too far. Dmharvey [[Image:User_dmharvey_sig.png]] Talk 18:12, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing interesting is said about 1984. Jitse Niesen (talk) 19:26, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unadulterated silliness. linas 22:47, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's all been said above. (1969 (film) should probably be removed from 1000 (number), as well, but that's a separate issue.) -- Arthur Rubin 23:01, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not interesting at all and doesn't contain info unique to the number. - Mgm|(talk) 07:56, August 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete it. I invited it over for tea and all it wanted to do was watch television and eat Ding Dongs. It's a really boring number. --Kooky | Talk 19:34, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, who needs to know this obvious information?  Thorpe  talk 11:28, 20 August 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.