Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fermat's Last Theorem in fiction (2nd nomination)

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. I see there has been some substantial work since this nom started and the consensus has since moved towards keep. Tone 21:12, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fermat's Last Theorem in fiction

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Last kept in 2008 as an "in popular culture" article, but it has remained mostly trivia since then. Almost completely unsourced, some original research, and appears to fail WP:LISTN. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 10:11, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. WP:TRIVIA list, this could be good for TVTropes or such, but not encyclopedic for us. Summary of reliably referenced items can be merged back to parent, if not already there. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:19, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. —AE (talk • contributions) 11:09, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:13, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 16:25, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not opposed to this article in principle. Fermat's Last Theorem has had more osmosis into the wider culture and for longer than pretty much anything else in higher mathematics, and it seems right to document that. At the same time, it also seems right to quarantine the topic from our coverage of the mathematics itself (it is verifiable but, one might say, marginal). XOR'easter (talk) 17:11, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There would need to be a considerable amount of literature discussing Fermat's Last Theorem in fiction to justify a full article on this. As such, this article is just WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. – FenixFeather ^{(talk)(Contribs)} 18:08, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not nearly coverage for this to warrant an article, there's already a "in popular culture" section on the Fermat's Last Theorem page. Zortwort (talk) 18:25, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with the proviso that entries which don't have discussion in secondary sources are culled. I'd rather the "in popular culture" section of the Fermat's Last Theorem page were shorter; that article should be about the math, and this one about the pop-cultural diffusion. Merging the supported-by-secondary-sources items here to that section would be an acceptable but suboptimal alternative. XOR'easter (talk) 18:47, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- It reads rather better with the examples that could only be sourced to TV Tropes removed. XOR'easter (talk) 01:07, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. A few of the more notable examples could be added to the main article. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:49, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have discovered a marvelous reason to keep the article, but don't have the time to explain it here. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:49, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per most of the arguments given here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fermat's Last Theorem in fiction. Paul August ☎ 14:46, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and keep separate. It's helpful to have this as an escape valve for the cruft that would otherwise clutter up the main FLT article, and recent work by XOR'easter has greatly improved its quality by getting rid of the OR and badly sourced entries. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:15, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I came here expecting to !vote delete, but the excellent work by XOR'easter shows that there are reliable sources for this stuff. I tend to dislike this kind of cruft, but FLT has been used quite a bit in pop culture. Including all the significant content here in Fermat's Last Theorem would be way undue and there are enough sources for a standalone page. — Bilorv_(c)(talk) 18:39, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: For those who may not have seen XOR'easter recent work on sourcing the article, please have a look. Paul August ☎ 19:12, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (separate as now): as per other keepers and previous discussion PJTraill (talk) 15:21, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep--Yasnodark (talk) 16:08, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Agree that, with the nice clean-up work, this is a pretty clear keep. One question is what to do with the section in the main FLT article; I am going to leave a comment on that talk page now, I invite others to join it. --JBL (talk) 22:49, 12 September 2018 (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.