Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metallic mean


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:38, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Metallic mean

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. The only reference is to a paper written by someone 15 years ago, but not from a reliable source that I can see, just hosted on their personal web. There may be some confusion over the name as that paper seems to be using 'mean' where we'd use 'ratio' (golden ratio, silver ratio etc.) but those already have articles for them, so this is unneeded. JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 22:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)


 * If this article is deleted, Silver ratio should be deleted. Hyacinth (talk) 00:37, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Silver ratio seems much more notable: it has a Mathworld entry for one which is pretty indicative and that has references. But anyway the notability of other articles is not at issue here per WP:OTHERSTUFF. I see another reference has been added to this but that is actually to the Mathworld entry Silver Ratio and says nothing about the "metallic mean"-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 01:05, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * See: . Hyacinth (talk) 03:00, 17 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Besides the references already provided, plus the book Wall, H. S. Analytic Theory of Continued Fractions, there are also applications to condensed matter physics related to aperiodic tilings, for example:, , and . --Sammy1339 (talk) 22:46, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The third reference you give doesn't use the term "metallic". And all three seem to be self-published papers; are these preprints of articles that have actually been published somewhere with editorial oversight? —Psychonaut (talk) 07:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * What term does the third reference given use instead of metallic? Hyacinth (talk) 15:16, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, I overlooked that the Wikipedia article we're discussing uses "silver mean" as a synonym for "metallic mean". The third reference does use this synonym.  My question about whether any of these terms has been used in peer-reviewed literature still stands. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:23, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * All the papers I cited have been published:, , . There are numerous other such papers. I chose representative papers from three different research groups. --Sammy1339 (talk) 18:08, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Hyacinth (talk) 01:56, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per the sources discovered by User:Sammy1339. —Psychonaut (talk) 19:18, 20 October 2014 (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.