Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boosted K-Means Clustering

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Davewild (talk) 18:23, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Boosted K-Means Clustering

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable research paper. I dream of horses (T) @ 08:00, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per nom, this is a summary of a research paper; if the theory is found notable, some cleanup is required. Now, with 48 cites in a journal with an impact factor of 1, I do not know how to evaluate notability in such a specific field. 48 cites could be a lot, or under the average. Tigraan (talk) 12:39, 15 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:34, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 (Talk) 13:58, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I don't think 48 cites of a research paper that is 11 years old is that impressive or indicates particular notability. —Мандичка^YO 😜 14:06, 30 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.