Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anecdotes on Mathematicians

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. Just Chilling (talk) 00:54, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anecdotes on Mathematicians

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An indiscriminate collection of quotes and anecdotes that appears to fail WP:LIST. Wikipedia is not Wikiquote. Kinu ^t/_c 22:40, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. Completely arbitrary list. Nwlaw63 (talk) 01:44, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as indiscriminate trivia. In case any anecdote is actually the subject of significant scholarly commentary, it should be covered in the primary biography article, not a separate list of no clear encyclopedic value. Sławomir Biały (talk) 17:09, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Sławomir Biały. Ozob (talk) 20:00, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:20, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As interesting as such anecdotes are, this appears to be WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Some of them are not even correct, for example the one attributed to John Milnor seems actually to refer to George Dantzig (who arrived late for a Jerzy Neyman lecture and thought the problems on the board were for homework). Agricola44 (talk) 15:32, 6 October 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Delete as truly paradigmatic failure of WP:NOT. postdlf (talk) 15:44, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. I actually found several of the list items to be amusing, but this is NOT ENCYCLOPEDIC information in any way. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:34, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or migrate to wikiquotes. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:14, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.