Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strassburg tablet


 * 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.  JGHowes   talk  01:57, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Strassburg tablet

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A Google and a Scholar Google do not provide any reference for "the Strasburg tablet". After having removed an irrelevant reference and a spam, it remains only one source, which refers to several Strasburg tablets. Moreover the source does not describe the content of the tablet, but provide only an interpretation (WP:OR) of this content in modern terms, without any way to verify the correctness of this interpretation.

If the tablet is correctly described, it deserve to have a Wikipedia article, but the available information is not sufficient D.Lazard (talk) 18:00, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. D.Lazard (talk) 18:00, 28 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete. The one source points to a book Strassburger Keilschrifttexte in sumerischer und babylonischer Sprache by Carl Frank, . One of its chapters "Sechs mathematische Texte" looks likely to be relevant but I don't appear to have subscription access (and anyway it would be in German, a language I don't read). But the article as it is now (or before the bad reference cruft was removed) does not clearly identify a tablet or point to sources useful for identifying the tablet. If this is notable, there is nothing present to build on as the base of a usable article, so we may as well delete unless/until someone identifies this more clearly. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:21, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm torn, because I do feel like this tablet exists, and if so, should theoretically be notable and be cited in multiple sources. However, a moderate search turns up a few mentions here or there, more as a trivia mention in articles and never discussed in depth. I hope someone can find more info on this, but as it stands, I'd vote to delete, or at least redirect to Babylonian mathematics and include relevant info there. Angryapathy (talk) 18:22, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete the tablet appears to exist and the collection of tablets may be notable, but the lead of the article is unsourced and so possibly inaccurate. There appear to have been six Strasbourg tablets, so the article title should probably be Strasbourg xxx, where xxx is the number of the tablet the Strasbourg mathematical tablets . The mathematical problem is discussed on pages 9 and 10 of the following JSTOR paper
 * Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2304569
 * Title: History of Mathematics Before the Seventeenth Century
 * Author(s): Raymond Clare Archibald
 * Source: The American Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 56, No. 1, Part 2: Outline of the History of
 * Mathematics (Jan., 1949), pp. 7-34
 * Published by: Mathematical Association of America TSventon (talk) 02:49, 31 May 2021 (UTC) Amended based on my comment below. TSventon (talk) 21:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * However, this article does not describe the content of tablet, but starts from a transcription in modern terms that are certainly not in the tablet. So, the accuracy of the description of the mathematics of the tablet is certainly doubtful. D.Lazard (talk) 08:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * D.Lazard Is there a policy on use of translations or transcriptions? The article is a chapter of a published book, republished in an academic journal so it looks like a reliable source. The book has references, but only the numbers are included in the journal version. The reference you removed as irrelevant contains the problem, but is a university mathematics problem sheet and thus not a reliable source. TSventon (talk) 13:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , Archibald's paper and book are certainly reliable for the analysis of the mathematical problem(s) attributed to the tablet. But certainly not for the assertion that the tablet describes this problem. Interpreting mathematics of cuneiform tablet is a very difficult task and generally requires the work of many specialist before reaching a consensus on their interpretation. In any case, this cannot be done without a clear description of the tablet, and a literate translation of it. Both are lacking in Archibald's work. This must be compared with the numerous articles on Plimpton 322 bibliography. In particular, the articles of Eleanor Robson in this bibliography show clearly what is a reliable source in this area. Archibald is definitively not a reliable source for a cuneiform tablet. D.Lazard (talk) 14:48, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , the name "the Strassburg tablet" seems to be an error as I explain under my comment. Also most of the existing article seems to be incorrect, so deletion is probably the best option. However I think that the the notability of the Strasbourg mathematical tablets could be established by coverage in multiple general histories, which they have. Not all articles need to be as long and technical as Plimpton 322. No original research applies to ideas for which no reliable sources exist, not to interpretations found in reliable sources, like the problem included in the article. TSventon (talk) 21:59, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment There seem to be six mathematical tablets in the Bibliothèque nationale et universitaire, Strasbourg collection, the "Sechs mathematische Texte" noted above. There are pictures on the Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative website, https://cdli.ucla.edu/ with reference numbers BNUS 362, BNUS 363, BNUS 364, BNUS 366, BNUS 367 and BNUS 368. Other sources use Strassburg or Strasbourg 362, etc. They are discussed in The Mathematics of Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, India, and Islam: A Sourcebook, ed Victor J. Katz, 2007 (Google Books snippet view) and Reading Strasbourg 368: A Thrice-Told Tale J Ritter, 2004 (Researchgate). So a useful article could probably be written by someone with access to a specialist library, but this is currently not a useful article. TSventon (talk) 14:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I think I have established that the source of most of the article was the Homework for Chapters 1 - 3 of the Spring 2009 Math 467 course at Sam Houston State University, which includes "An old Babylonian geometry problem is the following, found on the Strassburg tablet of about 1800 BC" (reference removed).


 * The university website at https://www.shsu.edu/kws006/Math_History/Math_History_home.html shows that in 2010 the course was using An Introduction to the History of Mathematics by Howard Eves, Jamie H. Eves, 1990 (Google Books snippet view). This has an example on page 58 "The algebraic character of Babylonian geometry problems is illustrated by the following, found on a Strassburg tablet of about 1800 B . C . " An area A , consisting of the sum of two squares is 1000 . The side of one square is 10 less than 2/3 of the side of the other square . What are the sides of the squares ? " ".


 * The other content may have come from a History of Algebra on the dipity website, which was apparently a free tool for making timelines, which is obviously not a reliable source (reference removed).


 * The remaining reference is a 1936 journal article, where pages 72 to 75 discuss Strasbourg tablets 262, 263 and 264, referenced to Neugebauer's Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte der Mathematik, Astronomie und Physik and Vorlesungen über Geschichte der antiken mathematischen Wissenschaften, which does not support the detail of the article.


 * David Eppstein, Angryapathy I have done some research above and "the Strassburg tablet" seems to be an error based on a university problem sheet. TSventon (talk) 20:25, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * D.Lazard I have added back the reference to a homework sheet, together with an unreliable source template, as it seems to be the immediate source of the mathematical problem and also of the term "the Strassburg tablet". TSventon (talk) 08:10, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete There was not a single, individual "Strassburg tablet", and the contents of the collection of tablets (Strasbourg 362 through 368) can be described in an article like Babylonian mathematics. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 22:14, 4 June 2021 (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.