Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of mathematical concepts named after places


 * 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. czar 06:00, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

List of mathematical concepts named after places

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

First, this seems to fail WP:LISTN. I can't find any reliable sources discussing this as a topic. About the few hits I come up with are a couple discussion forums (which was apparently the inspiration for this list), but that's not really enough.

There's nothing cohesive about the entries in this list themselves (be they theorems, problems, objects, etc.), only about their names, and in many cases, it's unclear if they even belong (is the Mexican hat wavelet really named after Mexico or a kind of hat?). As such, it runs afoul of WP:NOTDIR #6 (non-encyclopedic cross categorizations). –Deacon Vorbis (carbon &bull; videos) 00:05, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon &bull; videos) 00:05, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon &bull; videos) 00:05, 12 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Does having invented one of these names give me too much of a COI to discuss it? I agree, this is indiscriminate, both in why things are listed (name puns, named after place of original usage, named after things named after places, named after type of businesses named after cuisine named after place of origin, named after national origin of discoverer, named after fictional invention story, etc) and in the likely unwieldy size of this list if expanded to all names that could qualify. It's not clear to me why all of these things are included but for instance Catalan numbers aren't. (They are named after a person whose surname might refer to a place, but how is that less direct than being named after a type business named after a cuisine named after a place?) Additionally there is a likely problem with original research having to do with the lack of sourcing for each individual name and the evaluation needed to determine whether it really is a place name. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:00, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - Was going to fWas going to vote keep, but looked at the list. Many aren’t really named after places at all. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:13, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Most of them aren't named after places (unless Mexican hat is a place), plus problems, paradoxes (paradoxi?), etc. aren't concepts. The whole is less than the sum of the wildly disparate parts. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:34, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - no evidence of any in-depth reliable sources covering this 'phenomenon' as a group Spiderone  11:39, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Although I have the same mild COI as having named a number of objects after the locations I was in (or near) when I discovered them (often with an intended pun), I have never published the origins of these names (although I may have mentioned them in research talks). So, I think that most of the items on the list would pose some difficulty for having reliable sources talk about the names.--Bill Cherowitzo  (talk) 22:14, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete : I don't see any purpose for having such a list. I agree with the nominator it clearly fails LISTN. AngusMEOW  ( chatter  •  paw trail ) 12:48, 18 September 2020 (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.