Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1701 (number)

1701 (number)

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

1701 (number) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Info in the article seems a bit trivial. -- Beland (talk) 11:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Beland (talk) 11:03, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Compared to the standards at Wikipedia:Notability (numbers), that is. -- Beland (talk) 11:04, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per Wikipedia:Notability (numbers). None of the properties of this number listed here are interesting. Even the one that is plausibly a notable property, being a Harshad number, is not interesting: there are infinitely many Harshad numbers and this one is far far down in the sequence, so far that it is neither listed in the initial part of the sequence given by our article nor OEIS. And the Star Trek trivia isn't even about this number; it is just about a digit sequence that happens to be part of an alphanumeric designation of a fictional spaceship, not about the number that the same digit sequence represents. At best it would belong on a disambiguation page for 1701, not on the article about the number. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
• Weak keep Using the "nice" keyword on OEIS as a reasonable proxy for when a property might be deemed "interesting", I was able to scare up three examples, but one is equivocal, since 1701 appears way down the list; another strikes me as rather arcane and base-specific. The third is the best I could find. (Just being somewhere among the Stirling numbers of the second kind isn't remarkable, but being the largest $\left\{{n \atop k}\right\}$ for some $n$ is a little more noteworthy.) If I followed my own tastes, I'd have two "interesting" properties and would recommend a weak delete; sticking with how these discussions have interpreted OEIS tags for consistency, I'd end up at a weak keep. XOR'easter (talk) 23:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)