295:. The main problem with this article is the level: it uses the difference quotient definition to compute derivatives. There is no good reason to do this for any of the functions given; indeed, the only time anyone actually uses the definition to compute such derivatives during the brief time in a calculus course between the introduction of the derivative, and the introduction of the power rule. Therefore this page is
134:, which I think is also an important article). The tone of the article is also quite encyclopedic, and the article really helps to explain how to find a derivative; I understand that WP:NOT includes "how-tos," but this is a math function- it would be like the article for multiplication not explaining how to find a product. --
317:
As an analyst, I have to disagree that "the only time anyone actually uses the definition to compute such derivatives during the brief time in a calculus course between the introduction of the derivative, and the introduction of the power rule," but I agree that only a few of these should be kept and
129:
This article is definitely not an indiscriminate collection of information, nor is it a tutorial or instruction manual. Just like dictionaries have pictures of some words to (literally and figuratively) illustrate what they are, encyclopedias contain examples for reference. In particular, derivatives
108:
while
Knowledge (XXG) has descriptions of people, places, and things, Knowledge (XXG) articles should not include instruction - advice ( legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, video game guides, and
48:. Blurrrgh. Nothing's going to be solved here - there needs to be some kind of informed and agreed consensus by the maths guys as to what is and is not suitable, which we could then apply. If someone wants to prune it down and merge this into
547:. This is remniscent of the debate over whether semi-trivial proofs of theorems are suitable for WP or not. Perhaps this shouldbe considered to be in the same class? Might be worth setting a policy for. The WP "proofs" category is
299:
textbook material and should go. The tone of the article reinforces my opinion of this. It would not be enough to replace the calculations with more reasonable methods, since then it would just be lost property of the
304:. I don't think any of the examples is very valuable, nor do I think including one in the main article (note that there is already an example there) really adds anything besides how-to-ness.
380:). This is a selection of proofs that the derivatives in the table are correct; not a tutorial, for which the formulae in the table are more useful.
461:
17:
466:
514:
per GWO. (Possibly rename to "Individual
Episodes of The Derivatives", which are filmed weekly at a math class near you...)
131:
570:
36:
555:
537:
518:
506:
471:
428:
416:
384:
368:
356:
344:
322:
308:
285:
254:
230:
197:
152:
138:
119:
78:
533:
178:
166:
210:
is the only correct format for article titles, when in most cases it's awkward and a much better title would be
569:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
456:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
548:
242:
to 2 or 3 short examples, basically to illustrate the definition of derivative, then make this a section of
130:
are a very significant topic, and I beleive this page began as a split from the main page (just as there is
223:
158:
84:
170:
529:
377:
301:
219:
174:
498:
185:
to wikibooks (I think calculus examples are valuable, but we're not a textbook; they are). Perhaps
451:
448:
227:
162:
149:
281:
250:
116:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
487:
407:
269:
95:
515:
381:
365:
305:
135:
68:
115:
To which I think it is fair to call this article a tutorial on how to find derivatives.
502:
194:
441:
AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
353:
340:
277:
247:
157:
I had to mull over this one for a few minutes. If we can't have an article called
397:
482:. Almanac-like information. If this goes and individual episode summaries of
552:
483:
425:
393:
333:
319:
243:
190:
53:
49:
396:
article. Unlike some other subjects, one need examples to understand math. --
169:? I concluded that this article is badly named. I should rather be called
98:
an indiscriminate collection of information. In particular number 8 titled
268:
if they don't need this over there. This is a good example of what WP is
206:
Good points. I've noticed this kind of disease that makes people think
173:
or some such. No, if you're looking for examples of derivatives, see
148:
A few examples in the main article are fine, but this is ridiculous. —
551:, and it contains links to the debate where it last trailed off.
563:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
189:
of the example calculations should be merged into the main
447:
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks,
486:
stay ... sheesh, do we want to look like cretins? --
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
573:). No further edits should be made to this page.
52:, I don't think there would be many tears shed.
528:maybe a bit shortened. Current name is fine.
8:
497:. Why is this even a discussion? Too many
102:which specifically states the following:
181:and groups). This article should be
161:does that mean we also shouldn't have
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
318:merged into the main article. ;)
364:into main article, then redirect.
246:. No redirect link need remain. --
24:
392:an excellent addendum for the
177:, a valid article (and so are
1:
44:The result of the debate was
132:Derivative (generalizations)
590:
556:01:48, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
538:23:49, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
179:examples of vector spaces
167:examples of vector spaces
79:08:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
566:Please do not modify it.
519:13:05, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
507:11:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
472:22:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
429:12:01, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
417:19:23, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
385:02:49, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
369:02:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
357:06:14, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
345:14:05, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
323:23:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
309:13:40, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
286:12:02, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
255:03:55, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
231:04:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
198:03:35, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
153:02:59, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
139:02:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
120:02:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
549:Category:Article proofs
376:(or perhaps merge with
264:to Wikibooks, or just
224:Derivative (examples)
159:derivative (examples)
85:Derivative (examples)
378:Table of derivatives
302:table of derivatives
220:Table of derivatives
175:table of derivatives
501:spoil the broth. --
171:derivative (how-to)
100:Instruction manuals
332:Merge 1 or 2 into
163:examples of groups
474:
413:
252:
77:
581:
568:
469:
464:
459:
454:
446:
442:
412:
409:
405:
402:
272:, but Wikibooks
251:
75:
74:
73:
67:
66:
60:
59:
58:
34:
589:
588:
584:
583:
582:
580:
579:
578:
577:
571:deletion review
564:
530:Oleg Alexandrov
467:
462:
457:
452:
440:
414:
410:
403:
398:
382:Septentrionalis
88:
71:
70:
69:
62:
56:
55:
54:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
587:
585:
576:
575:
559:
558:
541:
540:
522:
521:
509:
499:encyclopedants
491:
490:
476:
475:
445:
434:
432:
431:
419:
408:
387:
371:
359:
347:
328:
327:
326:
325:
312:
311:
289:
288:
258:
257:
236:
235:
234:
233:
218:or something.
201:
200:
155:
142:
141:
123:
122:
112:
111:
104:
103:
87:
82:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
586:
574:
572:
567:
561:
560:
557:
554:
550:
546:
543:
542:
539:
535:
531:
527:
524:
523:
520:
517:
513:
510:
508:
504:
500:
496:
493:
492:
489:
485:
481:
478:
477:
473:
470:
465:
460:
455:
450:
444:
443:
437:
436:
435:
430:
427:
423:
420:
418:
415:
406:
401:
395:
391:
388:
386:
383:
379:
375:
372:
370:
367:
363:
360:
358:
355:
351:
348:
346:
343:
342:
337:
335:
330:
329:
324:
321:
316:
315:
314:
313:
310:
307:
303:
298:
294:
291:
290:
287:
283:
279:
275:
271:
267:
263:
260:
259:
256:
253:
249:
245:
241:
238:
237:
232:
229:
228:Keenan Pepper
225:
222:should stay;
221:
217:
213:
209:
205:
204:
203:
202:
199:
196:
192:
188:
184:
180:
176:
172:
168:
164:
160:
156:
154:
151:
150:Keenan Pepper
147:
144:
143:
140:
137:
133:
128:
125:
124:
121:
118:
114:
113:
110:
106:
105:
101:
97:
93:
90:
89:
86:
83:
81:
80:
76:
65:
61:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
565:
562:
544:
525:
511:
494:
479:
439:
438:
433:
421:
399:
389:
373:
361:
352:per Deville
349:
339:
331:
296:
292:
273:
265:
261:
239:
226:should go. —
215:
211:
207:
186:
182:
145:
126:
117:Jersey Devil
107:
99:
91:
63:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
424:- per nom.
390:Strong keep
336:and delete.
183:transwikied
516:AnonEMouse
484:Family Guy
394:Derivation
366:Masterpjz9
334:derivative
306:Ryan Reich
244:Derivative
240:Prune back
216:Foo in bar
212:Bar of foo
193:article. -
191:derivative
136:Kicking222
50:Derivative
350:Transwiki
262:Transwiki
208:Foo (bar)
354:Crazynas
297:de facto
109:recipes.
545:Comment
449:King of
278:Deville
248:Lambiam
422:Delete
293:Delete
270:WP:NOT
266:delete
146:Delete
96:WP:NOT
92:Delete
553:linas
426:Zaxem
404:eptor
362:Merge
320:Lunch
276:. --
195:lethe
57:Proto
16:<
534:talk
526:Keep
512:Keep
495:Keep
480:Keep
411:talk
374:Keep
341:Ruud
282:Talk
165:and
127:Keep
94:per
72:type
503:Dan
488:GWO
214:or
187:one
536:)
505:|
284:)
274:is
64:||
532:(
468:♠
463:♣
458:♦
453:♥
400:H
338:—
280:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.