Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ten-dimensional space


 * 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 redirect to String theory. (non-admin closure)  Ya  sh  !   16:15, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Ten-dimensional space

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article was made by a blocked user, and it is not notable enough.  Spike789    🇺🇸   23:05, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete indistinguishable from any other dimension of amount n as it has no special properties, unlike Seven-dimensional space or Three-dimensional space. There's a reason we have articles about only certain Regular polygons and not all of them. As such it is both irrelevant information and not notable.  Pinguinn     🐧   00:09, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:12, 29 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Article creator User:LittleWhole doesn't appear to be blocked. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:14, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 *  Weak delete  - ten is a pretty important, but not in this case, I think.Smmurphy(Talk) 00:20, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * What can I do to make this better? Sorry I am kinda new to Wikipedia (although I have a few years experience with Wikia) but I want to know how I can make this better. Do we want this deleted? From my view, simply this: We have pages for 10-polytopes, and all the other dimension pages are all just a round-up of all the data for the pages. I don't really want it deleted, I just want it to be just another round-up dimension page. (Sorry, I kinda am a math nerd, and I just LOVE multi-dimensional stuff.) LittleWhole (talk) 00:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Added more information I added some more information to the article (Now it looks like just one of the other dimension pages.) LittleWhole (talk) 01:08, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * To me, the articles on n-dimensional space for n>5 could be titled, "list of mathematical objects which are particular to n dimensional space". For n=9 and n=10, that list is pretty much just n-polytopes, for which there is already a page. So n=9 and n=10 might be removed if there isn't more substance showing why a collection of mathematical objects in n-dimensional space is notable beyond the notability of n-polytopes. For n=10, adding more discussion of 10-dimensional spacetime as used in string theory could pass the bar, I think. For n=9, I am not sure, but something could be added to improve that page as well.Smmurphy(Talk) 01:21, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) In other words, if a subject is notable only for one "sub-subject", then we might be better off with an article about the "sub-subject" than the subject (for instance, an author notable for only one book, then an article about the book might be better than an article about the author and another about the book). For people, this is the notability concern known as one event, and is sort of the problem here. Does that make sense? Smmurphy(Talk) 01:37, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

The thing is, n=9 and n=10 aren't done. I'll add them to the stub category immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LittleWhole (talk • contribs) 01:35, 29 November 2016 (UTC) OK, I get what you're saying, but how about those 7-dimension and 8-dimension pages? It really doesn't make sense to me how they got past without deletion, since they are just a repeat of the previous page, however just up a dimension. LittleWhole (talk) 01:40, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It said it was created by a blocked user, but that may be another article. I may have made a mistake on that one. But we still should delete the article, because I still feel that it is not notable enough.  Spike789    🇺🇸   01:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I have removed the nominator's bolded !vote above per WP:AFDFORMAT, which explains why. Basically, it's one per customer. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:26, 29 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. There is currently nothing in the article that could not have been written for any other number of dimensions by substituting ten for that number every time it appears. Until there is something *specific to this dimension* to say about 10-dimensional spaces, we should not have a separate article on this topic. See Notability (numbers): "Are there at least three unrelated interesting mathematical properties" [of this specific dimension]? As for the article creator: this was created long ago as a redirect by User:Lanthanum-138, who is indeed a blocked sock. LittleWhole converted it to an article today. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:06, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete (yes, I used to be Lanthanum-138, but that was a while ago when I was significantly less mature). There's nothing really specific about 9D and 10D the way 7D and 8D have at least something (mostly stemming from the octonions). Double sharp (talk) 02:14, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Ok, I finally give in. You may delete this page. LittleWhole (talk) 02:19, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It isn't about giving in, if you think you can improve it in the ways suggested. In fact, you are free to put the page in your user space and continue developing it. In the meantime, I don't think a delete is the right outcome, but rather it should revert to a redirect, as David Eppstein pointed out. Smmurphy(Talk) 02:21, 29 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Redirect to String theory, that is restore the redirect. Ten dimensions is mostly notable in physics, where it is the number of spacetime dimensions for a type of string theory. This article was originally a just a redirect and it should be restored. --Mark viking (talk) 02:23, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 *  Redirect Disambiugation It indeed should redirect until I finish the page in the User namespace. # REDIRECT Dimension It could lead to Dimension, 10-simplex, 10-cube, 10-orthoplex, 10-demicube, The Tenth Dimension, and Tenth dimension. I've copied the source code so I can continue editing it in the User namespace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LittleWhole (talk • contribs) 02:37, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect per - I recall reading about this as a solution to String theory. Not sure if anything came of it. Bearian (talk) 02:46, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to String theory...Rameshnta909 (talk) 11:47, 5 December 2016 (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.