Talk:Euler's relation

Is it possible to de-lonely this? Researcher (talk) 04:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

It should probably be deleted for being off-mission. - π 04:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm cool with that, but I also think that Euler's relation is one of the coolest things in math. Researcher (talk) 04:40, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I'd say to leave it. You never know when Andy my fuck stuff like this up (given his every more insane math rants), so it could be handy to have. How limited are we on space here? This isn't exactly taking a lot of room. δ_ij$^{i.broke.it.}$ 04:51, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I'm just on a mission to eliminate whatever possible from the lonely page. Researcher (talk) 04:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

(EC)The material on this site isn't for if Andy fucks stuff up. We deleted a heap of calculus stuff earlier, because it is off RW:MISSION. - π 04:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

It's definitely off mission, but I like it, dunno why, but I do. ^{I have just eaten} _& stilton^talk 04:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

99% of what is written here is bitching about what Andy (and other fundies like him) fucks up, is it not? Personally, I'd go nuts if all I was allowed to edit was refuting the anti-scientific bullshit they're spewing. How many times can we pound their shit about global cooling into the ground anyways? δ_ij$^{i.broke.it.}$ 05:02, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm in agreement with Cgb, but I want to integrate it better into the wiki anyway. Researcher (talk) 05:06, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I can completely agree with that. =) δ_ij$^{i.broke.it.}$ 05:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Well if you can find a place Euler's relation fits into the wiki, go nuts. - π 05:14, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Really on mission?

We have lots of math around here, and some is on-mission and others not so much. This relation (with my years and years of training up to the 3rd grade) seems to be a rather minor part of a larger "Euler Formula". Do we really need it? It seems far too obscure to me. En attendant Godot 14:13, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Nothing links here except mathematics. Where do we go for a delete? ArchieGoodwin (talk) 14:20, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Apparently the unofficial rule is you find 3 people who agree with you, and you delete. My rule is to wait till someone who knows anything about math says "yeah, this is bunk" or "no, no, what you're missing is that this is the single most important maths there ever has been, cause without it the world would lose all hope".En attendant Godot 14:26, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

It is a simple equation, but we aren't a math resource. Unless we are branching into teaching trig it doesn't matter. Тай^{говорить} 14:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Usually we keep off-mission maths and sciences articles if they help explain an on-mission concept. This article doesn't, however, and I'd go for merge then delete. Blue (pester) 20:27, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

So... now what? Ty^talk 12:34, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Not sure, there is an interesting point in the Tau Manifesto about this one, though. ADK^{...I'll agree your dishrag!} 12:36, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Keep — this is one of the most beautiful of equations. Chuck the rest of the cruft, but keep this. (((Zack Martin)))^™ 12:37, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I vote delete. Beautiful though it may be, this equation isn't even close to being on-mission. Metz77 (talk) 06:06, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Delete and it is not beautiful, it is a few symbols. - π 06:15, 1 December 2011 (UTC)