Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hexation

:{{la|Hexation}} ([{{fullurl:Hexation|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hexation}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

A non-notable operation that never produces numbers small enough to write out except the trivial cases, 1^^^^n=1, n^^^^1=n, and 2^^^^2=4. Georgia guy (talk) 13:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

• Merge in appropriate OPERATOR list or any mathematical page about it Rirunmot (talk) 16:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete or Redirect to Hyperoperation. In addition to the proposer's reasoning, the source for the name is unreliable. Tetration is used from time to time, but the extended names are not, except possibly by Goodstein. Hyperoperation is a potential redirect if the term were reliably used, as the notation is irrelevant. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:11, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
• In fact quintation is plausibly useful: it bounds the elementary recursive functions, which are a significant subclass of the primitive recursive functions. But I've not seen, and Google doesn't find, any articles with both quintation and "elementary recursive" in them. — Charles Stewart (talk) 08:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Redirect to Knuth's up-arrow notation. This article seems to exist only because "pentation" was the next logical step after "tetration", and "hexation" is the next after that, and it doesn't explain the operation very well in any event. I can see where this is going-- someone is going to put brackets around the word "heptation" next. Don't write an article if you have nothing to say. Mandsford (talk) 18:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
• Please don't feed the trolls. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Heptation&oldid=299270481. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 13:30, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
• Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Octation (!) — Arthur Rubin (talk) 02:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Comment. If the article is redirected, so should the talk page, whether or not this is normal practice. The discussion on the talk page (so far) is only related to the creation of the article from the redirect (by the anon), the proposed reversal and/or deletion, and some odd procedural questions. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:51, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete or redirect to one of the targets suggested above. No sources, no evidence that this term is widely used. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:11, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete (or maybe redirect) unless some reason for notability can be adduced. This sequence of operations seems to have been introduced in research related to Goodstein's theorem, which is notable because it's an easily comprehensible example of a true statement about natural numbers that is not provable in Peano arithmetic. But that doesn't mean every operation in this sequences is by itself notable. Michael Hardy (talk) 03:10, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete. This is an incredibly obscure topic, and best handled in the same way as most sources handle it: By mentioning and listing the sequence of which this is a part. Hans Adler 06:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete — There are no significant uses of this on WP, and it is not a significant term in mathematical logic. It is mentioned at Hyperoperation, which is all that is needed. — Charles Stewart (talk) 08:40, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
• Comment — Google tells me that hexation is the name of an EverQuest game power. — Charles Stewart (talk) 11:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

:The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.