Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Imaginary number

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 this AfD was imaginary. (non-admin closure) {{SUBST:replyto|Can I Log In}}^{PLEASE copy and paste the code to reply}(Talk) 00:30, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Imaginary number

This page contains material that is kept because it is considered humorous.
Such material is not meant to be taken seriously.

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

There's no such thing as an imaginary number. It's not real.^{[April Fools!]}--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 12:30, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep √-1mag√-1nary numbers are used √-1n mathemat√-1cs to solve equat√-1ons that could not be solved √-1n the real numbers. And, of course, √-1 am real l√-1ke you! GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 18:40, 1 Apr√-1l 2020 (UTC)
Keep. √-1 th√-1nk th√-1s should be kept too. ep√-1cgen√-1us (talk) 19:02, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Deleting √-1t would break the quadrat√-1c formula and would make some equat√-1ons √-1mposs√-1ble to solve l√-1ke x^2 + 1. √-1n addition, they are very useful. -KAP03 (^{Talk • Contr√-1but√-1ons • Ema√-1l}) 19:19, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Be ra√-1ional. One Blue Hat ^{❯❯❯ (talk)} 19:58, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You be rat√-1onal. And get on my plane of existence. Or should I say tesseract, because I am actually 4D? Pianostar9 (talk) 20:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Quadratic form. Imaginary numbers are just one-dimensional vectors with a negative unary quadratic form. 107.77.173.1 (talk) 20:48, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - As a hoax. Koridas (Speak) 22:38, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Get further input on this issue. It is a complex question. Margalob (talk) 22:56, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep--Actually there are some equations in optics that require you to use imaginary numbers for the math to work out correctly. So they do actually exist, in the same sort of sense that any other sort of number exists.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 00:03, 2 April 2020 (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.