Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sawilowsky's paradox

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. There's a suggestion that this be merged but the target is unclear, and there seems to be more of a sentiment in the direction of outright deletion. Thus I'm deleting this, though if someone wants to take a stab at merging I doubt that would be a problem, so I'm willing to restore for a quick merge if someone has the inclination and the knowledge to make it happen. --Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:53, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sawilowsky's paradox

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

I cannot find any secondary sources discussing this paradox - no hits in google scholar or google books and after a lengthy discussion on the talk page no other sources have been added. As this topic does not meet the general notability guideline it should be deleted. SmartSE (talk) 15:44, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Marginal notability at best, marginal referencing, don't like the idea that this is a use of WP to give prominence as a "paradox" what may be only a remark to those in the field. Charles Matthews (talk) 16:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:16, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge to Sawilowsky or to Abelson's paradox. All references (so far) to the name are from Sawilosky or his journal, and it does seem related to Abelson's paradox, merely using a different measure of correlation. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:05, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why bother with the charade - delete it!Edstat (talk) 23:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SOURCE. --Kkmurray (talk) 00:30, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for all reasons above. Iulus Ascanius (talk) 14:53, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Abelson's paradox. Nergaal (talk) 07:13, 26 November 2010 (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.