Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vinay Deolalikar
It appears that the proof has fallen through http://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2010/08/12/fatal-flaws-in-deolalikars-proofhttp://techcrunch.com/2010/08/12/fuzzy-math/#http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19313-tide-turns-against-milliondollar-maths-proof.htmlhttp://gowers.wordpress.com/2010/08/13/could-anything-like-deolalikars-strategy-work/. According to Aug 13 column by Scott Aaronson in MIT Technology Reviewhttp://www.technologyreview.com/blog/post.aspx?bid=349&bpid=25616, "As of this writing, Vinay Deolalikar still hasn’t retracted his P≠NP claim, but a clear consensus has emerged that the proof, as it stands, is fatally flawed.". Terence Tao, who is a Fields Medal winner and a real heavyweight in the subject, basically says the same thinghttp://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2010/08/10/update-on-deolalikars-proof-that-p≠np/.  I think this rather negates IAR arguments urging us to wait and to ignore #NEWS,  and  above. The fact that there has been a short spike in coverage by coverage, lasting a few days, does not make one notable - stories like that belong on wikinews, not on wikipedia. There have been lots of incorrect claims to solve this or that famous problem - most of them are now no more than historical footnotes. It may be that at some point in the future Deolalikar (or someone else) manages to use his ideas to prove something interesting and significant. If and when that happens, a bio article about him might become appropriate, but that is not the case now
— User:Nsk92, 07:59, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:NOT||WP:CRYSTAL||WP:BLP1E (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)