Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Horse paradox

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - kept - SimonP 02:19, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Horse paradox

The Horse Paradox page does not explain a real paradox, but rather lays out a smattering of word plays and jokes. However, if that assessment is wrong and it does have value in its discussion of logic, it might stay with a little cleanup help. Thus, I put it to a vote.

The first part was described to me in a discrete math course as the car paradox; it's a useful illustration of a logic "hole" in induction. The rest are just jokes and are not encyclopedic. Merge the first section into Mathematical induction or a related math page on common logic errors or suchlike. Keep and cleanup per Gazpacho and ESkog; that sounds like a better plan. android↔talk 03:52, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
Keep the first section, drop the rest. It's widely taught. Keeping it as a separate article allows it to be added to Category:Logical fallacies Gazpacho 03:45, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the first section and remove the rest. Checking out the history, the original author only included that first part and others have added other random jokes involving horses. Just needs some cleanup - I was taught this very same analogy in a discrete math course. ESkog 03:47, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless someone can show that this is a famous historical paradox in which case expand it to explain that.--Heathcliff 04:03, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is commonly told in math courses as a way of explaining need for care while applying induction. AnkA 04:08, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Not sure whether "horse paradox" is the best name, but this is certainly a commonly used example. Isomorphic 04:13, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, cleanup and expand. Megan1967 04:50, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Common in mathematical community. Does not need any cleanup. Keep the entire article. 24.126.17.155 08:55, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep--JiFish 10:49, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not notable enough for an article of its own. perhaps it could be merged into an article about the mathematical theory, and used as an 'example' section. doesn't deserve an article to itself --Cynical 13:24, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename. R adiant _* 15:04, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
Keep, and cleanup per Gazpacho. If the same paradox is also known as the car paradox, create a redirect. Eixo 16:29, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Del. Common enough example, but this shouldn't be its title (has anyone here ever heard it called this?). —msh210 18:14, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's equivocation, really. But I doubt anyone would look for it there. Gazpacho 20:51, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into mathematical induction. I agree that one paragraph is enough for this, in which case it shouldn't be a separate article. We can always spin it off later if it suddenly grows. Jitse Niesen 22:50, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Jitse Niesen. --Unfocused 14:09, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the whole article, interesting and encyclopedic. Grue 16:27, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think I already saw this somewhere. In any case this is a commonly taught example and is a very illustrative example of mathematical induction. I like all the variations, but I'm not sure how notable they are. I'm voting Keep anyway. Deco 00:56, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.