Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/0.05

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 delete. Sandstein 08:48, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

0.05

[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)

Contested PROD. Original reason was: Not a notable number (apart from maybe p value but that's hardly worth mentioning here). Reason still stands. Jalen Folf (talk) 05:17, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Jalen Folf (talk) 05:17, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Nothing specific to this number in this article. D.Lazard (talk) 07:39, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, do something with it. So, mathematically, this is the same as 1/20 or 5%. Decent number of articles redirect from 5% titles. Something to that. Hyperbolick (talk) 08:33, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, it's an 'interesting' number. The article needs cleanup, but there's definitely some stuff to write on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BEANS X2 (talk • contribs) 09:37, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: from Wikipedia:WikiProject Numbers#How far to go?: Fractions from halves (1/2) to twentieths (1/20 to 19/20) are acceptable at this point.

As it says a few lines above that one, These are proposals. Can't see that these proposals have ever gained wide acceptance. —Kusma (t·c) 22:14, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, very little specific information about this number in the article, and the cited references seem offtopic. —Kusma (t·c) 22:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There just isn't much to write about this number, it's not very interesting. The article isn't good as it is and I don't think it will ever become good. How could we ever find a source discussing the number 0.05 specifically? Tercer (talk) 21:51, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I feel I need to go full OTHERSTUFF here. 0.01 redirects to a music album. 0.1 is a redirect to a list entry. 0.2 doesn't exist. 0.25 is a disambig with no link for the fraction. 0.33 is a disambig of which the relevant entry links to Fraction. 0.4 doesn't exist. Only 0.5 has an article, sensibly. This mix of disambs, redirects and rap albums seems to persist for evey other fraction I could be bothered to try. - By current usage, we are not entertaining articles on random fractions, very likely because they are liable to be nothing but heaps of trivia. There's no reason to go there. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:29, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. An indiscriminate collection of trivia disguising the fact that there is nothing of depth here. Neither WP:GNG (in-depth coverage in multiple sources of this specific number) nor WP:NNUM ("at least three unrelated interesting mathematical properties") are in evidence. We don't even have a separate article on 1/3, much more important as a fraction; why is this one special? And if we're going to have articles on whole-number fractions, we shouldn't use decimal for them, because then more-important ones like 1/3 wouldn't have a good name. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:54, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. One could write an entire article about the choice of cut-offs for significance in applied statistics, with the number 0.05 playing a prominent role; but I doubt that a proper title for the article would be "0.05", and its content would be completely disjoint from the content current at 0.05. --JBL (talk) 13:19, 9 February 2021 (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.