Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/288 (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The result was Withdrawn by nominator. Withdrawn by nominator (non-admin closure) Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 19:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

288 (number)

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

Appears to fail the general notability guideline for numbers Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 11:48, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 11:48, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Could use some citations, I don't think one number is better than another. Oaktree b (talk) 11:51, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NUMBER. The article satisfies criterion 1 by describing (more than) three unrelated interesting mathematical properties, and criterion 3 by appearing in What's Special About This Number?. Certes (talk) 13:22, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Needs sourcing but WP:DINC. There are plenty of interesting and sourceable mathematical properties for this number, starting with it being superfactorial, as well as some mysticism coming from its high number of factors. See e.g. . —David Eppstein (talk) 16:23, 31 May 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.