Wiki143:Articles for deletion/KarlSchererRevisited1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:15, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Packing problem

Sorry about this, but Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/MoreKarlScherer ended with no consensus, due to many people voting to keep simply because they didn't want to vote on all the articles listed at once, so now they are listed seperately. This is the VfD for

For the reason to delete this article, see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/MoreKarlScherer

NOTE THAT THE ARTICLE DOES NOT CONTAIN DISCUSSION OF THE MATHEMATICAL ISSUE which is discussed at Sphere packing

  • Delete ~~~~ 00:45, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, MathWorld has an article, google returns 10k results on "circle packing". Why is this up for deletion? Slike2 01:42, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. The 10k results surely refer to the concept of sphere packing, not the concept described in this article. -- BD2412 talk 03:10, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment, the 10k results do not refer to sphere packing, the first 10 results are explicitly about circle packing, though one of them does talk about hexagon packing along a spherical surface. Also, the fourth result is this, which is a book on the subject of circle (NOT sphere) packing. Slike2 00:44, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment a circle is by definition a 1-sphere. The article on sphere packing clearly states this in the first paragraph. There does not exist a seperate mathematics. brenneman(t)(c) 01:08, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep it's a fcommon enough mathematical concept and problem. Ben W Bell 07:48, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
    • The article discusses Karl Scherer's classification of them as a distinct type of entertainment puzzle, giving two basic examples. Circle and sphere packing is more properly discussed at sphere packing. ~~~~ 08:04, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep if expanded and sourced, as per Slike2, otherwise delete. JamesBurns 02:59, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as well-known mathematics conundrum. Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 12:43, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete all of these O.R. articles, please -Harmil 15:53, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand. Well known and difficult mathematical problem. — RJH 16:19, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete and redirect. Keep and expand would be great if it hadn't already been done in sphere packing. Although I am amused by the underwhelming description of the sphere packing problem as "hard". brenneman(t)(c) 16:45, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Redwolf24 17:04, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Disambiguate between the mathematical sphere packing and the computer science knapsack problem. --Carnildo 19:46, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Redundant with sphere packing. siafu 22:37, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong keep and expand: this is a branch of maths/physics which is undergoing rapid development. The classic problem was sphere packing, but current interest centers on many other shapes, including random figures and ellipsoids. In fact I don't understand why this and the next few pages are up for deletion anyway. Bambaiah 09:15, July 18, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, as sphere packing is a sub-set of this general case. Peter Ellis 03:43, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
Have you read the article? There is no general case in it. Besides, spheres are the general case, thanks to conformal mapping ~~~~ 07:50, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
This comment is a little misleading: if this were merely a matter of conformal mapping then it wouldn't change the number of nearest-neighbour contacts. Furthermore search on cond-mat arxiv in just the current year led me to 74 papers on packing problems. Moreover, I see no compelling reason presented by people who voted to delete (except for those who did this with the partial information that packing problems reduced to sphere or circle packings). Bambaiah 08:38, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
Obviously "sphere packing" is a general case of a "packing". The fact that the article as yet only gives examples of "sphere packings" and "circle packings" is irrelevant. Paul August ☎ 16:11, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep: This is a legitimate and common mathematical problem. File:Monkeyman.pngMonkeyman 14:39, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong keep. This is very frustrating. I get the impression that many of the people voting to delete have never contributed to a math article, or are otherwise unaware of current topics of math research. Yet they feel confident to vote to delete? Sorry for that knee-jerk reaction, but this is a bit out of control. linas 15:08, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Extra Strong keep As by linas. --R.Koot 15:56, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Legitimate mathamatical topic. Paul August ☎ 16:00, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Oleg Alexandrov 17:51, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. The sphere packing article is about packing spheres in an unbounded space, while packing problem is about packing general objects (though at present only spheres are treated) in a bounded space. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 18:24, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
A bounded space is a limited case of an unbounded space. I.e. it is a sub-topic. Limits are easy to apply, when the unbounded case is already solved extensively. ~~~~ 21:08, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
Limits are not that easy. I challenge you to find a formula for how many circles can be packed in a square of size d by d. If you can (and it's correct), I'll vote delete. Jitse Niesen (talk) 22:22, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
Given a circle of size c then (((2d-(2+root(3))c)d)/(square(c)root(3))). General case is that HCP is most dense, so HCP. First consider tiled situation - circles with superscribed hexagons, determine number across square, also determine number down square (these are not the same as hexagon is not 90 degree rotational symmetry), this gives number of tiles total. There will always be fractional tiles at the boundary, so subtract them. Boundary wraps so this is easy. ~~~~ 22:54, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
But the optimal pattern is not always hexagonal. For instance, if the circle has diameter 1 and the square is 2-by-2, then you can fit 4 circles in the square, but only three if you insist on a hexagonal pattern. Returning to the VfD, I note that the American Mathematical Society lists "Spreads and packing problems" as 51E23 in their Mathematics Subjects Classification (link). You say that the article is "up for VFD as neologistic categorisation", but I don't see anything in the article talking about this classification. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 23:22, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
You obviously haven't read "packing problems are one area where puzzles". ~~~~ 06:47, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Could be expanded but discusses a currently vibrant branch of mathematics. Frankly, I'm a little surprised its even up for deletion. Chuck 19:38, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
Mainly because despite the article title, it does not discuss the mathematical treatment, which is already described at sphere packing. ~~~~ 21:08, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment why are there suddenly so many keep votes in one day when there was such a large gap before? ~~~~ 21:05, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Answer Because somebody bothered to notify the people that would perhaps know about it here and here. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 22:22, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Ril: what is the point of this question? Paul August ☎ 02:15, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, although it definitely could use improvement... - dcljr (talk) 21:14, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • keep Count Iblis 00:30, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
user has 61 prior edits ~~~~ 21:28, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
And you have 2132 edits on VfD pages. One of the first pages I started here, DAMA/NaI, was listed for a VfD. There are a lot of people here that want wikipedia to dumb down. Count Iblis 21:32, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
I do not have 2132 edits on VFD, I have a total of 1392 edits on the entire Wikipedia: namespace. I also have 4688 edits to articles. See Kate's tool ~~~~ 13:04, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep a more general problem,though it needs improvement Salsb 01:43, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and add content. Karol 06:35, July 21, 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "http://debianws.lexgopc.com/wiki143/index.php?title=Wiki143:Articles_for_deletion/KarlSchererRevisited1&oldid=1583661"