Talk:aritmetikkens fundamentalsætning

RFD discussion: October 2020–August 2021
It may be a sum of parts but a similar discussion is given further above for the German entry starting from August 2020. HeliosX (talk) 18:08, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep by the same reasons as given for the German term .__Gamren (talk) 13:43, 6 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep: >SOP &mdash; Dentonius 06:43, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Struck per our previous discussion. Imetsia (talk) 00:59, 5 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Not really SOP, but theorems and lemmas (also e.g. = ) are rather somewhat encyclopaedic than dictionary stuff. For spelling and pronunciation,  has all the information.  and  show that there are many theorems with personnames like Satz von * or * theorem, *'s theorem, should wiktionary really have them all? --幽霊四 (talk) 11:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * There's plenty of disagreement about where the limits of inclusion should be drawn, and maybe this should be discussed as a policy question on BP rather than on a random RFD entry. Personally I don't understand your rationale for excluding this. The fact that one could write an encyclopaedic article about the fundamental theorem of arithmetic seems irrelevant, since the same is true of dogs, cars and cats. Sometimes I'll encounter some term in an article that the authors can't be bothered to define, and if there's even a WP article about it, it'll have a long-ass lede and a motivation section, and then define the term somewhere in the body. A dictionary serves a different need than an encyclopædia: it just tells you what the word means, briefly and without wasting your time.__Gamren (talk) 01:50, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, but solely for the reason of stare decisis per Gamren. I agree on the merits that the entry should be deleted. Imetsia (talk) 00:59, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * RFD-kept. Imetsia (talk) 00:59, 5 August 2021 (UTC)