- 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 keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:44, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Moduli scheme
- Moduli scheme ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable mathwank, no sources found. Prod declined without comment. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 18:53, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. The article was already referenced. I have just added a high-quality reference to a major theorem by a Fields Medallist. WP:CIVIL applies here, too. Charles Matthews ( talk) 19:05, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:07, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep. A quick google search finds tons of papers about the topic. So even though it's just a stub, notability seems clear. -- Deacon Vorbis ( talk) 19:23, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- WP:SNOW keep. There are multiple books entirely about this subject [1] [2], including also Fields medalist and MacArthur fellow David Mumford's doctoral dissertation [3]. — David Eppstein ( talk) 20:13, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep. Obviously notable topic, OK article. Rentier ( talk) 01:06, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- @ Charles Matthews: @ Deacon Vorbis: So if it's so notable, then why was the article literally untouched for NINE FUCKING YEARS?!?!?! Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 05:48, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- @ TenPoundHammer: While we are on rhetorical questions. If you have been here for 11 years, how come you have so little clue about guidelines on notability, civility, and WP:BEFORE? Driving Twinkle without due care and attention isn't exactly a recommendation, you know. What did you screw up now? Plenty. Charles Matthews ( talk) 06:18, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. Technical articles can sit around for ages on Wikipedia without getting the attention they require, because experts are rare and their free time less than copious. But the subject matter deserves coverage nonetheless. XOR'easter ( talk) 15:19, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. Notable mathematics topic. No valid reasons given for deletion. Sławomir Biały ( talk) 20:19, 24 August 2017 (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.