Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rishab's 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 was   delete.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 18:26, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Rishab's Number

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The creator contested the prod with "This number is entirely my work and no one has come up with it before me so there is no way of having a third party source. This number is useful for chemistry students who want to save time. I have given all sources from where i got the equations. [emphasis added]". Non notable. → Σ  τ  c. 21:15, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as Original Research. Also non-notable. If this number hasn't been invented before (under another name) then there should be publications about it in Journals, etc. So why aren't there any? If it has been invented before, then this "rediscovery" by a school-boy is non-notable. Pit-yacker (talk) 21:56, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:51, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as unsourced OR. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:19, 24 December 2011 (UTC).
 * Delete per WP:NFT. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:30, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is closely related to the einstein. BTW, the numeric value should be 0.119627 (using J and mol instead of KJ and nmol).  --Lambiam 19:21, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, obviously, but... I'm on an iPad so can't do this myself, but can somenone give a gentle explanation on author's talk about OR etc.? I'm disdainful of OR egotism by adults, but need we crush the spirit out of this youngster utterly and completely? EEng (talk) 22:30, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Eppstein has given a link to a guideline that is clear enough. There is also WP:NOR. Xxanthippe (talk) 23:23, 25 December 2011 (UTC).


 * Delete. I assume that the author was simply unaware of our policies.  We aren't a publisher of original thought (WP:NOR) or for things made up one day (WP:MADEUP).   Sławomir Biały  (talk) 12:38, 27 December 2011 (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.