Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How to get the prime factors of a 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 of the debate was delete. -lethe talk [ +] 05:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

How to get the prime factors of a number
The content of this article, which is only loosely related to its title, is already covered in divisibility rule. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 16:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT a how to guide.--Isotope23 16:45, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Not too sure about that. This article is essentially a (rather poorly written) description of an algorithm. These have a place in WP. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 16:50, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It's written as a "how-to", which normally I would have probably said should be moved and rewritten, but since it is already covered elsewhere as you stated in your nom, deletion is the best bet.--Isotope23 18:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete, but as second choice redirect to Integer factorization. It's not a very likely search term which is why I didn't make the redirect first choice, but for future reference, it might have been better to skip AfD and just redirect boldly. --Trovatore 16:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * This effectively means deleteing it. This article doesn't seem to meet CSD, so I doubt it's wise to do that without discussion. What would the author say? -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 17:23, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Likely nothing; a lot of times these people are just playing around and don't bother to follow up. But if he objected, he could revert, and then you could put it on AfD. --Trovatore 17:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete or Redirect. As Meni stated above, the contents are already discussed in another article with greater coverage. --  127 . * . * . 1  17:05, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothig here that isn't in divisibility rule is there.  --Richard Clegg 17:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. 1. Content is already elsewhere. 2. This will make a poor redirect. — Encephalon 17:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom & Encephaon. &mdash; Arthur Rubin | (talk) 18:50, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. (Note to the author: seventeen is prime.) Dmharvey 18:55, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Poor information, poorly written, misplaced. --KSmrqT 19:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, do not transwiki. -lethe talk [ +] 20:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, do not redirect, do not transwiki. --Saforrest 21:13, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. DarthVad e r 01:10, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. As written above, Wikipedia is not a "how to". Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 01:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per all said above. F. Yupigo 21:07, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Interesting, but Wikipedia is not suitable for how-to guides.&#160;—  The KMan  talk  22:14, 30 April 2006 (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.