Talk:Pinsky phenomenon

Just a talk abstract

This article is little more than a paraphrase of a talk abstract by Pinsky at a recent AMS conference. It is unsuitable as an encyclopedic definition of the Pinsky phenomenon without a major rewrite. Hqb (talk) 20:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There really is the Pinsky Phenomenon in mathematics. I am not making it up. Refererences provided. So many researchers use it. Help me keep this. It is mathematically imprortant. AmeliaElizabeth (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:44, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is challenging the existence of the Pinsky phenomenon. The problem is that the description in the article does not make it clear what exactly the phenomenon is, and why it is notable. To address the first part, you'll probably want to base the explanation more explicitly on the material in Pinsky's book, rather than on his talk abstract. It might also be wise to omit mentions of the recent generalizations and extensions (the main topic of the talk), and concentrate on just the basic phenomenon itself.

As for notability, I'm less sure how to proceed. Google Scholar gets a total of 15 hits for "Pinsky phenomenon", of which about half are papers by either Pinsky himself or his coauthor Michael Taylor, and none of the hits list more than 10 citations. It is also not clear what the larger significance of Pinsky's result is: is it merely a theoretical curiosity, or does it have practical consequences in, e.g., wave physics? In contrast, "Gibbs phenomenon" gets 4,220 GS hits, making it unquestionably notable, both in pure mathematics and in signal-processing applications.

It is a little surprising that you have chosen to write an encyclopedia article on something so relatively obscure as the Pinsky phenomenon, if you do not consider yourself at least reasonably proficient in Fourier analysis. Are you perhaps a junior student of Prof. Pinsky, or otherwise connected to Northwestern University? If so, you might be able to find a local expert to help you flesh out the article, and establish the notability of the concept. Hqb (talk) 10:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would say notability is still not established. Unless anyone is willing to improve it I suggest that it should be nominated for deletion? Billlion (talk) 20:39, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]