Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mason Triangle


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 00:57, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Mason Triangle

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Apparently non-notable mathematical concept. Google scholar turns up squadoosh: as does a regular Google search:. The "journal" used as a reference, "Math Kos1" also turns up nothing at all: making me think it does not actually exist. This is an unremarkable geometric shape, and feels like something someone made up at school one day. Jayron  32  03:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - No evidence of notability. (I'm pretty sure that's because it's mathematically fairly uninteresting). Thparkth (talk) 03:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I am sorry Jayron32. I will try to scan Math Kos1 ASAP. It is our school math section newspaper kind of. A visiting scholar wrote about this curve and it looks pretty remarkable to me. No offense. Anyway, I will try to scan that newspaper asap, in the meantime I send you my best wishes and warmest regards. I am sorry if I caused any trouble, I never intended to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skywalkerdhc (talk • contribs) 03:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


 * No apologies necessary. You aren't expected to know every Wikipedia policy the moment you show up.  You may want to read over Your first article to get some understanding of how to write a good first article, and more importantly, how to choose a topic to write about.  Not every conceivable idea will merit a Wikipedia article.  Notability and Verifiability are also good things to read.  -- Jayron  32  03:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete: Mason triangle is possibly notable, but it's a triangle associated with Freemasonry and it's a actual triangle, not a curve. The graph appears to be a variety of hypotrochoid, but the equations given are wrong for that and when I graphed them I got a different curve. I assume the equations given have a typo somewhere but can tell what the correct version should be. In any case the article seems to be OR.--RDBury (talk) 05:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I figured out what the equations probably should be and fixed the article, just for fun since the article still seems to be OR. It is a hypotrochoid but there is no indication in the article as to why this particular assignment of the parameters is notable.--RDBury (talk) 05:49, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - not notable and not especially interesting, or at least no more interesting than an unknown number of other similar curves (it's a Spirograph curve of which there are probably thousands) -- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 09:37, 11 January 2010 (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.