Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intelligent Water Drops algorithm: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 19:51, 20 July 2016

Revision as of 11:19, 22 July 2016

Line 2:

{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|T}}

:{{la|Intelligent Water Drops algorithm}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intelligent Water Drops algorithm|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 July 1522#{{anchorencode:Intelligent Water Drops algorithm}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks">[https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Intelligent_Water_Drops_algorithm Stats]</span>)

:({{Find sources AFD|Intelligent Water Drops algorithm}})

Yet another "nature-inspired" [[metaheuristic]]. This is a field of computer science where citation circles seem to be the norm rather than the exception, so the few references in the article do not convince me. Without a well-respected overview article or book mentioning this, this doesn't pass [[WP:GNG]]. —''[[User:Ruud Koot|Ruud]]'' 14:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Line 11:

:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Science|list of Science-related deletion discussions]]. <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">[[User:Northamerica1000|North America]]^{[[User talk:Northamerica1000|<font size="-2">1000</font>]]}</span> 20:55, 15 July 2016 (UTC)</small>

*'''Oppose''' for each of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Intelligent Water Drops algorithm]], [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glowworm swarm optimization]], and [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cuttlefish Optimization Algorithm]]. For each of these there are multiple publications in academic journals over a period of years. That seems to establish [[WP:GNG]]. If these are to be deleted I would want a counterargument to the default assumption that the articles cited are not reliable. Peer reviewed academic research which addresses a topic by name is usually considered to meet [[WP:RS]] and establish [[WP:GNG]]. Why demand a higher standard in this case? [[User:Bluerasberry|<span style="background:#cedff2;color:#11e">''' Blue Rasberry '''</span>]][[User talk:Bluerasberry|<span style="background:#cedff2;color:#11e">(talk)</span>]] 19:51, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|[[Wikipedia:Deletion process#Relisting discussions|Relisted]] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br />

<small>Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">[[User:Northamerica1000|North America]]^{[[User talk:Northamerica1000|<font size="-2">1000</font>]]}</span> 11:19, 22 July 2016 (UTC)</small><!-- from Template:Relist --><noinclude>[[Category:Relisted AfD debates|Intelligent Water Drops algorithm]]</noinclude></div><!-- Please add new comments below this line -->