Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Lists of mathematics topics

Lists of mathematics topics[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list removal nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: Open 21 days, significant problems not addressed. Delist -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 13:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This list lacks sources. Something needs fixing, either the list itself or the source requirement (item 1c) as it pertains to topic lists. The Transhumanist 21:48, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does cite the Mathematics Subject Classification. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Quoting the lead: "This list has some items that would not fit in such a classification, such as list of exponential topics and list of factorial and binomial topics, which may surprise the reader with the diversity of their coverage." Also, the list doesn't specify which ones are in the cited source (Mathematics Subject Classification), and which ones are not. The Transhumanist (talk) 03:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Those not included need citations of their own, unless it is deemed unnecessary for this type of list. For example, since this is a list of mathematics topics, and the mathematics nature of each topic is covered in its article, should the principle of "pass-through" apply? That is, since sources are supposed to be presented in articles already, why would they need to be included on topic lists when all you would need to do is click on a link to check the source in the article? Is this redundancy in Wikipedia's citation requirement (WP:VER) needed? This is the only featured "topics" list on Wikipedia, and may set a precedent for topic lists to follow, so I'm very interested. The Transhumanist (talk) 03:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - There is no requirement in WP:V that references have to be explicitly given, only that material is verifiable in theory. It's clear that the relationship of these topics to math is verifiable in theory, which meets WP:V. Is there an item on the list you think it not related to mathematics? — Carl (CBM · talk) 14:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - The list fails to meet featured list criterion 1c. Should an exception be made for this list? The Transhumanist (talk) 22:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - I don't believe it's an exception; it's the common-sense application of WP:V to a list of this sort. — Carl (CBM · talk) 22:51, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        What are the common sense reasons? And what about featured list criterion 1c? How should that be interpretted with respect to lists of this sort? The Transhumanist (talk) 22:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"The Transhumanist" neglected to link to this: Wikipedia:Featured list criteria (I presume this is what he meant by "FLC".). Michael Hardy (talk) 00:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry. It's fixed now. The Transhumanist (talk) 03:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per The Transhumanist's reasoning. Criterion 1c says that "Claims are supported with specific evidence and external citations", whereas this article doesn't. This article would not pass FLC due to this, and mathematics articles are not subject to special treatment. LuciferMorgan (talk) 16:37, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per above. It's just an outdated FL.--Crzy cheetah 22:32, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per nom and above comments. Rai-me 04:08, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist - per nomination, and as said, above comments. Rt . 11:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]