Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mathematical Discussion of Rangekeeping

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 and move to non-capitalized title. — CharlotteWebb 14:58, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mathematical Discussion of Rangekeeping

~~Insufficient data in which no one can improve on. My suggestion is to merge delete this article with another suggested article. Sr13 03:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)~~[reply]

Forget everything I've said before...looked at the article and I declare keep. Sr13 03:41, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 14:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per nom--Jusjih 15:31, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as having no content whatsoever, though somehow it does not fit the WP:CSD criteria of the same name. Resolute 00:12, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep after rewrite, though I am not certain that that is the best title for this article. Resolute 19:00, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nearly {{db-empty}}, no sources, WP:OR approach Sandstein 17:44, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep after excellent rewrite. Sandstein 19:02, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC) -Keep. Article has changed a lot, and for the better. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 19:18, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because I am now filling it in. I have been working on the rangekeeping article for over a month. I developed a computer issue as I started writing the "bad page" and I have now recovered. I have my research completed and I am now writing the page. I expect to complete writing this page within the next week. blacksheep 01:09, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This article is actually looking rather good now. J Milburn 09:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move as the title is capitalised when it needn't be. Mathematical discussion of rangekeeping would be better, would it not? J Milburn 15:40, 15 October 2006 (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.