Deletion of History of quaternions

Comment: I am not an expert on the subject, but unless this is entirely , it is an article that we need.  It is correctly flagged for rescue
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: My understanding is that the question at issue here is whether or not Wikipedia should have an article on History of quaternions.  The answer to that question, I think, is obviously yes, so obviously that I think this may fall under .  The current article is very bad, but that is a separate problem, and is not a good reason for deletion and for the subsequent 6-month ban on creating a new article on the history of quaternions.  The correct response to a very bad article is to fix the article.  If that means burning it to the ground and starting over—and in this case it might—so be it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)