Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mathematical joke (2nd nomination)


 * 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 Speedy Keep per WP:SNOW. Warden (talk) 21:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Mathematical joke
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Sorry for bringing this up a second time. I know the last nomination was a speedy keep, but I propose that this article be deleted (once more for a number of reasons): Kayau (talk · contribs) 12:57, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Per WP:GNG, the topic must have significant coverage. However many ghits there are for the topic, nearly all of them are simply collections of maths jokes. These would be considered primary sources. True, there are a couple that are actually about maths jokes, but there aren't enough to satisfy the GNG.
 * A Google Book search shows that most of the books are books with maths jokes rather than books ABOUT maths jokes.
 * Unlike knock-knock joke, maths jokes are a THEME of jokes, not a FORM of jokes. Correct me if I'm wrong, but joke themes are not very researchable topics per se. (Nothing on Google Scholar)
 * Since our major sources here (BOOKS, INTERNET (incl. NEWSPAPERS), JOURNALS) all lack information on this topic, WP:V will be hard to meet.
 * Joke collections are unencyclopaedic.


 * Keep John Allen Paulos, among others, would disagree that this is not a legitimate topic: "Mathematics and Humor" ... guess I should have put something about this book in the article (oops). - DavidWBrooks (talk) 13:05, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * As you know, a few sources are not sufficient to establish notability. Scholars write books on all sorts of weird things... I've searced for 'mathematical humour' in Google Books and this is the only book on mathematical humour that came up (the rest are collections of jokes, etc.)Kayau (talk · contribs) 13:25, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * More than enough to keep this article, however: A single notable source is certainly enough to establish notability. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 13:58, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * This guy has made a career out of math & humor ... and he should be in the article, which (you're right) does need improving. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:00, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Here's another one: http://hudsonvalleygeologist.blogspot.com/2011/05/dave-gorman-math-stand-up-comedy.html ... heck, and another I'll be darned! - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Gorman is not purely a mathematical comedian. As for Parker, he does not appear to be a very notable guy (Matt Parker is a redirect to a fictional character); there are lots of weird jobs in the world and not all merit an article. Mathematics and Humour does not appear to be a notable source. I haven't watch Briain yet, but according to the WP article, his show does not appear to consist only of maths jokes. Kayau (talk · contribs) 14:18, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Reviews of collections suffice as secondary reliable sources, and are easy to add. Boas's book on Mathematical lion hunting would be significant, like Paulos, etc. Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  14:07, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I've done some googling around and honestly I'm not sure what the book is about, exactly. *blush* However, according to the Amazon description, it doesn't seem to be about maths jokes. Kayau (talk · contribs) 14:24, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * delete People are seriously defending a list of jokes as an article?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? At the very least if it is to survive, it should be renamed List of mathematics jokes. Mangoe (talk) 14:12, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Go and read, , , and User:Uncle G/Cargo cult encyclopaedia article writing. Uncle G (talk) 19:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:IDONTLIKEIT is generally not a good argument in an AfD. Mkdw talk 21:49, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Snow Keep this second AFD is a waste of time the claims made by the nominator indicate not only a lake of WP:Before but willful disregard for the very poliy cited. The following sources alone establish WP:N according to WP:GNG
 * and there are at least a thousand more where these came from. BO &#124; Talk 14:42, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * When this is over, perhaps we should discuss on the article talk page whether Mathematical humor would be a better article title, to include discussion about math-related comedians as well on analysis of why math and humor overlap in interesting ways ... "jokes" is kind of limiting. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 17:18, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I see that Mathematical humor already exists - as a redirect from this article! hmmm ... - DavidWBrooks (talk) 17:43, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep There are apparently excellent sources. FWIW, the earlier AfD was closed as speedy keep. I suggest the same here  DGG ( talk ) 17:36, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The first discussion was closed as speedy keep because . Xe turned out to be a single-purpose account.  The same cannot be said of Special:Contributions/Kayau.  Uncle G (talk) 19:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Snowball Keep - notable, verifiable topic. - Altenmann >t 18:33, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Kayau, the technical name is a joke cycle, and joke cycles very much are studied by folklorists and are researchable. Not all of them are. , , , and  apparently weren't.  The question is whether folklorists and others have studied this joke cycle.  Uncle G (talk) 19:56, 5 January 2013 (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.
 * The first discussion was closed as speedy keep because . Xe turned out to be a single-purpose account.  The same cannot be said of Special:Contributions/Kayau.  Uncle G (talk) 19:56, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Snowball Keep - notable, verifiable topic. - Altenmann >t 18:33, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Kayau, the technical name is a joke cycle, and joke cycles very much are studied by folklorists and are researchable. Not all of them are. , , , and  apparently weren't.  The question is whether folklorists and others have studied this joke cycle.  Uncle G (talk) 19:56, 5 January 2013 (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.