Talk:Parity problem

Untitled

The Karatsuba phenomenon has no relation to the sieve theory and methods etc: I deleted the part which has no relation to the name of the topic indicated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.75.30.9 (talk) 17:06, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

To administrators: please delete the rediraction from "Karatsuba phenomenon" to this page "Parity problem (sieve theory)", it's stupid.91.79.183.226 (talk) 22:40, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Parity problem/CommentsTalk:Parity problem/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

== Assess at B, Low == Article is in pretty good shape (if I do say so myself). Would benefit from quotes from Selberg (either his original 1949 paper or his Lectures on Sieves), and would benefit from more description of the parity-sensitive sieves.--Uncia (talk) 15:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 15:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 02:27, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 18 September 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. As Parity problem disambiguation page was deleted at AfD this has made this nomination uncontroversial and merely procedural, while also noting lack of opposition to the remainder of the proposed move. Thus per discussion Parity problem (sieve theory) is moved to Parity problem in order to remove unnecessary disambiguation. (closed by non-admin page mover) CNC (talk) 09:12, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

---

• Parity problem (sieve theory) → Parity problem
• Parity problem → Parity problem (disambiguation)

– This is very obviously the WP:PRIMARY topic. The existence of the syntagm "parity problem" in the other dabbed article is not more prominent with respect to the term "parity problem". The current page at "Primary problem" is a disambiguation page; that page should be at Parity problem (disambiguation) and this page should be at Parity problem. —Alalch E. 14:27, 18 September 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. Ophyrius (he/him
T • C • G) 14:04, 25 September 2025 (UTC) — Relisting.  --pro-anti-air ––>(talk)<–– 20:49, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: Doing both moves would cause a WP:ONEOTHER problem. The second entry at the DAB page does not have an article on its own, but refers to two other articles (even though DAB entries are only supposed to have one blue link as far as I know). So, I think we should only do the first move, deleting the DAB. Parity problem (disambiguation) should be tagged with G14 afterwards. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 10:09, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

  @1isall I have fixed the second dab entry to make it MoS-compliant. What are your toughts? —Alalch E. 23:11, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

  Entry looks good now, but the ONEOTHER problem would still be there. Thanks, 1isall (talk | contribs) 10:19, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

  Yes, this is a ONEOTHER dab because it has two entries and one is the primary topic. However, as both entries are valid even though there are only two of them, the dab is not (and is not going to be) eligible for G14. But it may be deleted in an AfD. An AfD can be started even now, while this RM is running. —Alalch E. 11:24, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Note: Refer also to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parity problem.—Alalch E. 16:07, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

• Having two parallel discussions makes it hard to tell: What is the proposed outcome here? Is it to rename Parity problem (sieve theory) to Parity problem, and add two hatdabs on that page pointing to regular language and Matroid parity problem? Or is it to rename Parity problem to Parity problem (disambiguation) and rename Parity problem (sieve theory) to Parity problem? The latter sounds fine; the former sounds not quite so fine. --Quuxplusone (talk) 17:40, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

  It isn't hard to tell. One half of the proposed outcome of this RM is pending on the AfD outcome: (1) If the dab is deleted, the article is moved to the title the dab formerly occupied. (2) If the dab is not deleted, the dab is moved out of the way by being itself disambiguated through the addition of "(disambiguation)" to its title, and the article is moved to the title the dab formerly occupied. —Alalch E. 22:17, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.