Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dwyer function: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Closing debate; result was delete |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 17:
*<small>'''Note''': This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Science|list of Science-related deletion discussions]]. </small> <small>-- [[User:Fabrictramp|Fabrictramp]] ([[User talk:Fabrictramp|talk]]) 14:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)</small>
*'''Delete''' Fails [[WP:V]], [[WP:N]] and possibly even [[WP:NOR]]. There are no sources in recognized and established scholarly publications that use the term "Dwyer function" in relation to this function or that mention this function by any other name. The term appears to be used only in two papers by Dwyer posted at the Algana Associates website[http://www.algana.co.uk/Research/research.html], which is associated with Dwyer[http://www.algana.co.uk/HistoryofComputingGroup/HistoryofComputingGroup.htm]. The website has no other papers posted, no editorial board, no refereeing procedure, no editorial statement and no submission procedure posted. No hits in GoogleScholar[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Algana+Associates%22&hl=en&lr=], WebOfScience or Scopus for anything to do with Algana Associates. So the two Algana Associates articles are essentially self-published and do not pass [[WP:RS]]. The subject of the article also fails [[WP:N]]. There is no indication that the name "Dwyer function" in relation to this function is widely accepted or even widely used in the scientific community. In fact, apart from a few false positives, GoogleScholar[http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22Dwyer%20function%22&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=ws] and WebOfScience return zero hits in relation to the "Dwyer function". Even the plain Google search[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Dwyer+function%22&btnG=Search] returns only 32 hits, most of which are false positives. [[User:Nsk92|Nsk92]] ([[User talk:Nsk92|talk]]) 01:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete'''. See the talk page, no hits of this on Google scholar, and none on mathscinet. The only actual "publication" is an obvious unreliable source, Algana Associates, which is not an academic journal. Publications in academic journals are the basic standard of reliability and notability in the mathematical sciences. [[User:Silly rabbit|<
*We now have a [[Wikipedia:Content forking|content fork]] of the same article at [[D function]], which should also be '''deleted'''. —[[User:David Eppstein|David Eppstein]] ([[User talk:David Eppstein|talk]]) 02:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Certainly not notable. [[User:Xxanthippe|Xxanthippe]] ([[User talk:Xxanthippe|talk]]) 06:28, 27 April 2008 (UTC).
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||