Template:Did you know nominations/Chihiro number - Wikipedia

Article Images

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Allen3 ^talk 09:05, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

... that the Chihiro numbers form a sequence that grows faster than any conventional mathematical function?

ALT1: ... that recursively finding Chihiro numbers can quickly produce some of the largest numbers in mathematics?

Created by Wjxb (talk). Self nominated at 03:45, 24 April 2014 (UTC).

~~New article, and the article's sources check out. I'd suggest a different hook, just due to the fact that more people enjoy movies than math~~:— Preceding unsigned comment added by Partched (talk • contribs) 18:47, 24 April 2014

... that the Chihiro numbers inspired the name of the main character from Spirited Away?

The different hook citation is a dead link. I cannot find any other online reference saying this either. So Different hook is not confirmed. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:53, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. I'd keep it on the page for now, but I'd prefer one of the mathematical hooks to be used if the article is linked. Wjxb (talk) 00:02, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

The article is also big enough and no plagiarism detected. However we do need to have more citations. For example the Properties section has no inline citations at all. Probably this can be addressed by repeating one or more of the existing refs. The proposed hook or alt1 hook are in this section, so are also uncited. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:44, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- The existing sources work as citations, and have now been addressed. I didn't know if mathematical details that could be verified without sources needed to be sourced. Apologies. Wjxb (talk) 11:16, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I realise this is closed but it needs to be noted that the key sources do not exist and that this was a blatant hoax. Dougweller (talk) 14:48, 28 April 2014 (UTC)