Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trigonometry in Galois fields


 * 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.  Sandstein  19:57, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Trigonometry in Galois fields

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

All references have the same author. Article created by the author of the references (his login name is its initials). Non notable subject: A Scholar Google search provides only references to the same author Thus WP:COI and WP:OR D.Lazard (talk) 11:33, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. D.Lazard (talk) 11:56, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Transwiki to Wikiversity or delete. The article is nicely written, but the nom is correct: I don't see any significant reliable sources independent of the main author. This topic has not yet generated coverage in independent RS, per WP:RS, that are needed for verifiability and notability per WP:GNG--perhaps a case of WP:TOOSOON. While not yet suitable for WP, this content may fit better at Wikiversity and may be a good candidate for a transwiki transfer. Otherwise, without independent RS, and with no good merge or redirect targets I could find, deletion seems the best course. --Mark viking (talk) 23:42, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 * delete (vote change) . keep if you education does not allow you to carry out due diligence in the area. Finite-field trigonometry is fairly well developed, albeit narrow area of research. WP:TOOSOON is a ridiculous judgement: it is at least 20 years, even by sources cited.  Staszek Lem (talk) 02:43, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:52, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * perhaps you could indicate those sources, because the ones actually in the article seem pretty weak: MathSciNet shows only irrelevant or self-citations. --JBL (talk) 01:51, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * This is an article from as early as 1972, this is 1973. You have to search for trigonometry+"finite field". Anyway, I do not really care about the subject. Please notice that "the author of the references" is the only one sho treats the field systematically. But, first, there are also article by others, most probably his students, because they also appear is his co-authors. Second, there is a bunch of disconnected articles dealing with trigonometric formulae in finite fields. Since some authors are Russian, there may be publications in Russian language. Third, this is related to cryptography. Therefore I think this subject deserves some attention. Staszek Lem (talk) 02:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I have spent about 5--10 minutes comparing the first paper you mentioned to the article in question (which is to say, enough to skim both but not to fully digest the subtleties of either). As far as I can tell, they are not actually related.  The journal article is about character sums of a finite field, i.e., certain maps from the field into the complex numbers; the wikipedia article is about functions from certain finite fields to their sub-fields.  Am I mistaken?  --JBL (talk) 14:14, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * OK you convinced me to change my opinion, especially keeping in mind that article authors do not care to chirp in here. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:25, 13 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete, it is undergraduate maths text, nothing useful here, the article was created in 2006 and has more or less sat unchanged since. Szzuk (talk) 08:54, 16 April 2018 (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.