Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Are we nearly there yet equation


 * 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 DELETE. Rlevse 23:39, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Are we nearly there yet equation

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

An in-joke from someone's personal website. no evidence of notability, neither in article, not in google `'Míkka 21:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete on notability grounds. It's just a joke page from an academic's web space. &mdash; BillC talk 22:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Add: further to Iain99's comments below, news articles like this are particularly common during the summer silly season, when genuine news is in short supply, and newspapers resort to frivolous filler articles. I have variously seen formulae for calculating the funniest joke, the ideal beach holiday and we now have the Are we nearly there yet? equation. You can see that all these stories date to the summer months. As Iain99 and MarkBul say, there is no lasting notability here beyond what papers print for a few days during a slack period.&mdash; BillC talk 00:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Keep, meets notability. Carlosguitar 22:32, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT and WP:NOT. After reading this discussion again, it appears the mentions in the UK press were really just publicity for Škoda Auto. Keep and include sources mentioned by Carlosguitar Delete relies on a self-published source. Might even be speedily deleted because there is no assertion of importance. --Pixelface 22:06, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

*Keep per sources found by carlosguitar. Delete unless sources reporting on the eqaution (or hoax or advertisment) over a broader timeframe can be found. Notability is not temporary Guest9999 15:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)]]
 * Keep per CarlosguitarMandsford 22:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete After being cited in the British media above, it will never be heard from again. A one-off mention in the media is no different than any other news item - Wikipedia is not a newspaper. MarkBul 23:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * delete from keep I have re-evaluated, and I now conclude deleting is the best option. -- Anonymous Dissident  Talk 23:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I am inclined to agree with MarkBul. This is a news story, the same story repeated in a few media outlets on and around 20-22 July. There is no evidence of long-term, historical notability here. --Malcolmxl5 23:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * This was one of a number of mathematically meaningless equations which appeared in the British media last year . Essentially they were a novel form of advertising - dreamed up by PR companies, who found academics to put their names to them to get them into the press and get publicity for their sponsors (Skoda in this case). For one analysis of the phenomenon, see . As such, I don't think they're particularly encyclopaedic, nor do I think they meet notability guidelines, having got a little press for a day or two and then being rightly forgotten. (WP:NOT). The phenomenon itself might have merit as an article, but I haven't see any sources describing it apart from Ben Goldacre's Guardian columns. Ergo, delete. Iain99 23:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into and article per Iain99 if one can be found, otherwise DeleteBurzmali 00:24, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:RS, WP:V, WP:OR.-- Sef rin gle Talk 07:14, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article appears pretty ridiculous and meets WP:OR —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheInfinityZero (talk • contribs) 15:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. You can find lots of such math jokes on the internet, and that does not mean they are notable even if they have received a one-shot mention from a journalist looking for a fun news story. Agree with Iain99's analysis and MarkBul's point. Sjakkalle (Check!)  10:44, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - this is not notable. I agree with MarkBul, BillC, Iain99 and Sjakkalle's comments. Unlikelyheroine 11:57, 3 September 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.