Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cascade correlation algorithm - Revision history

MalnadachBot: Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)

2022-02-13T03:47:48Z

← Previous revision		Revision as of 03:47, 13 February 2022
Line 26:		Line 26:
	*'''Keep''' - I think this stands up as an independent article. It could use some expansion, such as graphics illustrating the algorithm and more specific explanation of how it works, but that can happen with time. The expanded version I'd want would be too long for inclusion in whole in Arificial neural networks (but a "see also" between them would certainly be relevant). [[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|<span style="color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk</span>]] 17:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' - I think this stands up as an independent article. It could use some expansion, such as graphics illustrating the algorithm and more specific explanation of how it works, but that can happen with time. The expanded version I'd want would be too long for inclusion in whole in Arificial neural networks (but a "see also" between them would certainly be relevant). [[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|<span style="color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk</span>]] 17:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' or at the very least '''Merge''' . I don't know how you get as few as 472 google hits. I found the entry useful.		*'''Keep''' or at the very least '''Merge''' . I don't know how you get as few as 472 google hits. I found the entry useful.
	:''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>		:''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>

MalnadachBot: Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2)

2021-10-09T16:39:25Z

Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2)

AnomieBOT: Substing templates: {{unsigned2}}. See User:AnomieBOT/docs/TemplateSubster for info.

2015-02-20T12:42:09Z

Substing templates: {{unsigned2}}. See User:AnomieBOT/docs/TemplateSubster for info.

← Previous revision		Revision as of 12:42, 20 February 2015
Line 7:		Line 7:
	The result was '''Keep''' [[User:Deville\|Deville]] ([[User talk:Deville\|Talk]]) 15:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC)		The result was '''Keep''' [[User:Deville\|Deville]] ([[User talk:Deville\|Talk]]) 15:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
	===[[Cascade correlation algorithm]]===		===[[Cascade correlation algorithm]]===
	Not notable, only 472 google hits, no citable info, just a .pdf file, no evidence of notability ~~{{unsigned2~~\|2006-08-28 02:30:30~~\|Kmaguir1}}~~		Not notable, only 472 google hits, no citable info, just a .pdf file, no evidence of notability <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Kmaguir1\|Kmaguir1]] ([[User talk:Kmaguir1\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kmaguir1\|contribs]]) 2006-08-28 02:30:30</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->

	*'''Google scholar is not google''' 472 is an amazing number of papers on a subject, and the pdf file is of a peer-reviewed paper. yes, the wrong source was cited, but the reference is as good as they get. [[User:LinaMishima\|LinaMishima]] 02:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Google scholar is not google''' 472 is an amazing number of papers on a subject, and the pdf file is of a peer-reviewed paper. yes, the wrong source was cited, but the reference is as good as they get. [[User:LinaMishima\|LinaMishima]] 02:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Deville: /* Cascade correlation algorithm */ closing as keep

2006-09-03T15:43:57Z

Cascade correlation algorithm: closing as keep

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ===[[Cascade correlation algorithm]]===
 Not notable, only 472 google hits, no citable info, just a .pdf file, no evidence of notability {{unsigned2|2006-08-28 02:30:30|Kmaguir1}}
@@ Line 19: / Line 26: @@
 *'''Keep''' - I think this stands up as an independent article.  It could use some expansion, such as graphics illustrating the algorithm and more specific explanation of how it works, but that can happen with time.  The expanded version I'd want would be too long for inclusion in whole in Arificial neural networks (but a "see also" between them would certainly be relevant). <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|LotLE]]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|talk]]</font> 17:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 *'''Keep''' or at the very least '''Merge''' . I don't know how you get as few as 472 google hits. I found the entry useful.

81.174.179.44: /* Cascade correlation algorithm */

2006-09-03T15:38:39Z

Cascade correlation algorithm

← Previous revision		Revision as of 15:38, 3 September 2006
Line 18:		Line 18:
	*'''Keep''' - Comes up during any introductory course on neural networks and introduces significant changes to these. Also, the topic recently has been getting attention in the field of modelling cognitive development.[[User:blackvoid\|blackvoid]] 15:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' - Comes up during any introductory course on neural networks and introduces significant changes to these. Also, the topic recently has been getting attention in the field of modelling cognitive development.[[User:blackvoid\|blackvoid]] 15:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' - I think this stands up as an independent article. It could use some expansion, such as graphics illustrating the algorithm and more specific explanation of how it works, but that can happen with time. The expanded version I'd want would be too long for inclusion in whole in Arificial neural networks (but a "see also" between them would certainly be relevant). <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|LotLE]]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|talk]]</font> 17:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' - I think this stands up as an independent article. It could use some expansion, such as graphics illustrating the algorithm and more specific explanation of how it works, but that can happen with time. The expanded version I'd want would be too long for inclusion in whole in Arificial neural networks (but a "see also" between them would certainly be relevant). <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|LotLE]]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|talk]]</font> 17:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' or at the very least '''Merge''' . I don't know how you get as few as 472 google hits. I found the entry useful.

Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters: keep

2006-08-28T17:44:47Z

keep

← Previous revision		Revision as of 17:44, 28 August 2006
Line 17:		Line 17:
	*'''Keep''' - Referenced, encyclopaedic. Notability is a terrible criterion in Math, Science and the like [[User:WilyD\|WilyD]] 13:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' - Referenced, encyclopaedic. Notability is a terrible criterion in Math, Science and the like [[User:WilyD\|WilyD]] 13:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' - Comes up during any introductory course on neural networks and introduces significant changes to these. Also, the topic recently has been getting attention in the field of modelling cognitive development.[[User:blackvoid\|blackvoid]] 15:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' - Comes up during any introductory course on neural networks and introduces significant changes to these. Also, the topic recently has been getting attention in the field of modelling cognitive development.[[User:blackvoid\|blackvoid]] 15:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' - I think this stands up as an independent article. It could use some expansion, such as graphics illustrating the algorithm and more specific explanation of how it works, but that can happen with time. The expanded version I'd want would be too long for inclusion in whole in Arificial neural networks (but a "see also" between them would certainly be relevant). <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|LotLE]]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|talk]]</font> 17:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Blackvoid: /* Cascade correlation algorithm */

2006-08-28T15:33:00Z

Cascade correlation algorithm

← Previous revision		Revision as of 15:33, 28 August 2006
Line 16:		Line 16:
	*'''Keep''' seems to have a reasonable number of citations according to CiteSeer. [http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/3769.html] [[User:Cedars\|Cedars]] 11:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' seems to have a reasonable number of citations according to CiteSeer. [http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/3769.html] [[User:Cedars\|Cedars]] 11:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' - Referenced, encyclopaedic. Notability is a terrible criterion in Math, Science and the like [[User:WilyD\|WilyD]] 13:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' - Referenced, encyclopaedic. Notability is a terrible criterion in Math, Science and the like [[User:WilyD\|WilyD]] 13:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' - Comes up during any introductory course on neural networks and introduces significant changes to these. Also, the topic recently has been getting attention in the field of modelling cognitive development.[[User:blackvoid\|blackvoid]] 15:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

WilyD: /* Cascade correlation algorithm */

2006-08-28T13:22:45Z

Cascade correlation algorithm

← Previous revision		Revision as of 13:22, 28 August 2006
Line 15:		Line 15:
	*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' seems to have a reasonable number of citations according to CiteSeer. [http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/3769.html] [[User:Cedars\|Cedars]] 11:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' seems to have a reasonable number of citations according to CiteSeer. [http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/3769.html] [[User:Cedars\|Cedars]] 11:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' - Referenced, encyclopaedic. Notability is a terrible criterion in Math, Science and the like [[User:WilyD\|WilyD]] 13:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Cedars: /* Cascade correlation algorithm */

2006-08-28T11:55:15Z

Cascade correlation algorithm

← Previous revision		Revision as of 11:55, 28 August 2006
Line 14:		Line 14:
	*'''Keep'''. This article has enough information to exist on its own. Furthermore, the topic is interesting. Non-notability should be less of an issue as this article may not be particularly popular, given the specialized topic, however, it does provideuseful information that some users would enjoy. Wikipedia is not a paper. As such there is essentially limitless space to provide useful information. Going in depth on topics will only add to the value of Wikipedia to users. [[User:Nlsanand\|Nlsanand]] 05:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep'''. This article has enough information to exist on its own. Furthermore, the topic is interesting. Non-notability should be less of an issue as this article may not be particularly popular, given the specialized topic, however, it does provideuseful information that some users would enjoy. Wikipedia is not a paper. As such there is essentially limitless space to provide useful information. Going in depth on topics will only add to the value of Wikipedia to users. [[User:Nlsanand\|Nlsanand]] 05:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' seems to have a reasonable number of citations according to CiteSeer. [http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/3769.html] [[User:Cedars\|Cedars]] 11:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

MichaelBillington: Keep

2006-08-28T11:08:59Z

Keep

← Previous revision		Revision as of 11:08, 28 August 2006
Line 13:		Line 13:
	*'''Comment''': This concept seems to show up on [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=%22Cascade-correlation+algorithm%22&btnG=Search Google scholar with 472 cites]. Taking a look at some of these might provide information to flesh out this article. <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|LotLE]]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|talk]]</font> 02:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Comment''': This concept seems to show up on [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=%22Cascade-correlation+algorithm%22&btnG=Search Google scholar with 472 cites]. Taking a look at some of these might provide information to flesh out this article. <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|LotLE]]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|talk]]</font> 02:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep'''. This article has enough information to exist on its own. Furthermore, the topic is interesting. Non-notability should be less of an issue as this article may not be particularly popular, given the specialized topic, however, it does provideuseful information that some users would enjoy. Wikipedia is not a paper. As such there is essentially limitless space to provide useful information. Going in depth on topics will only add to the value of Wikipedia to users. [[User:Nlsanand\|Nlsanand]] 05:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep'''. This article has enough information to exist on its own. Furthermore, the topic is interesting. Non-notability should be less of an issue as this article may not be particularly popular, given the specialized topic, however, it does provideuseful information that some users would enjoy. Wikipedia is not a paper. As such there is essentially limitless space to provide useful information. Going in depth on topics will only add to the value of Wikipedia to users. [[User:Nlsanand\|Nlsanand]] 05:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

← Previous revision		Revision as of 15:33, 28 August 2006
Line 16:		Line 16:
	*'''Keep''' seems to have a reasonable number of citations according to CiteSeer. [http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/3769.html] [[User:Cedars\|Cedars]] 11:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' seems to have a reasonable number of citations according to CiteSeer. [http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/3769.html] [[User:Cedars\|Cedars]] 11:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' - Referenced, encyclopaedic. Notability is a terrible criterion in Math, Science and the like [[User:WilyD\|WilyD]] 13:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' - Referenced, encyclopaedic. Notability is a terrible criterion in Math, Science and the like [[User:WilyD\|WilyD]] 13:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' - Comes up during any introductory course on neural networks and introduces significant changes to these. Also, the topic recently has been getting attention in the field of modelling cognitive development.[[User:blackvoid\|blackvoid]] 15:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

← Previous revision		Revision as of 13:22, 28 August 2006
Line 15:		Line 15:
	*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' seems to have a reasonable number of citations according to CiteSeer. [http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/3769.html] [[User:Cedars\|Cedars]] 11:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' seems to have a reasonable number of citations according to CiteSeer. [http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/3769.html] [[User:Cedars\|Cedars]] 11:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' - Referenced, encyclopaedic. Notability is a terrible criterion in Math, Science and the like [[User:WilyD\|WilyD]] 13:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

← Previous revision		Revision as of 11:55, 28 August 2006
Line 14:		Line 14:
	*'''Keep'''. This article has enough information to exist on its own. Furthermore, the topic is interesting. Non-notability should be less of an issue as this article may not be particularly popular, given the specialized topic, however, it does provideuseful information that some users would enjoy. Wikipedia is not a paper. As such there is essentially limitless space to provide useful information. Going in depth on topics will only add to the value of Wikipedia to users. [[User:Nlsanand\|Nlsanand]] 05:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep'''. This article has enough information to exist on its own. Furthermore, the topic is interesting. Non-notability should be less of an issue as this article may not be particularly popular, given the specialized topic, however, it does provideuseful information that some users would enjoy. Wikipedia is not a paper. As such there is essentially limitless space to provide useful information. Going in depth on topics will only add to the value of Wikipedia to users. [[User:Nlsanand\|Nlsanand]] 05:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' seems to have a reasonable number of citations according to CiteSeer. [http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/3769.html] [[User:Cedars\|Cedars]] 11:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

← Previous revision		Revision as of 11:08, 28 August 2006
Line 13:		Line 13:
	*'''Comment''': This concept seems to show up on [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=%22Cascade-correlation+algorithm%22&btnG=Search Google scholar with 472 cites]. Taking a look at some of these might provide information to flesh out this article. <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|LotLE]]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|talk]]</font> 02:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Comment''': This concept seems to show up on [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=%22Cascade-correlation+algorithm%22&btnG=Search Google scholar with 472 cites]. Taking a look at some of these might provide information to flesh out this article. <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|LotLE]]</font>×<font color="darkred" size="-2">[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|talk]]</font> 02:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep'''. This article has enough information to exist on its own. Furthermore, the topic is interesting. Non-notability should be less of an issue as this article may not be particularly popular, given the specialized topic, however, it does provideuseful information that some users would enjoy. Wikipedia is not a paper. As such there is essentially limitless space to provide useful information. Going in depth on topics will only add to the value of Wikipedia to users. [[User:Nlsanand\|Nlsanand]] 05:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep'''. This article has enough information to exist on its own. Furthermore, the topic is interesting. Non-notability should be less of an issue as this article may not be particularly popular, given the specialized topic, however, it does provideuseful information that some users would enjoy. Wikipedia is not a paper. As such there is essentially limitless space to provide useful information. Going in depth on topics will only add to the value of Wikipedia to users. [[User:Nlsanand\|Nlsanand]] 05:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
			*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

← Previous revision		Revision as of 16:39, 9 October 2021
Line 16:		Line 16:
	*'''Merge''', not notable enough to stand alone.-[[User:Kmaguir1\|Kmaguir1]] 03:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Merge''', not notable enough to stand alone.-[[User:Kmaguir1\|Kmaguir1]] 03:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	**'''Merged, awaiting redirect''' I saw no reason for the content to not be on [[artificial neural networks]], so it's been merged. Haven't done the redirect yet, as I'd consider that bad AfD form (since it's effectively deleting) [[User:LinaMishima\|LinaMishima]] 03:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		**'''Merged, awaiting redirect''' I saw no reason for the content to not be on [[artificial neural networks]], so it's been merged. Haven't done the redirect yet, as I'd consider that bad AfD form (since it's effectively deleting) [[User:LinaMishima\|LinaMishima]] 03:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	***Please copy over my expanded citation details for original article if content merged. ~~<font color="darkgreen">~~[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|~~LotLE]]~~<~~/font>×<font~~ ~~color~~="~~darkred" size="-2~~">[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|talk]]</~~font~~> 03:18, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		***Please copy over my expanded citation details for original article if content merged. [[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|<span style="color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk</span>]] 03:18, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	****Done, thank you for that! Unfortunately the referencing sytle the article uses makes seeing the addition hard, but it's there, in the same format as the rest (or as near as possible). [[User:LinaMishima\|LinaMishima]] 03:28, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		****Done, thank you for that! Unfortunately the referencing sytle the article uses makes seeing the addition hard, but it's there, in the same format as the rest (or as near as possible). [[User:LinaMishima\|LinaMishima]] 03:28, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Comment''': This concept seems to show up on [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=%22Cascade-correlation+algorithm%22&btnG=Search Google scholar with 472 cites]. Taking a look at some of these might provide information to flesh out this article. ~~<font color="darkgreen">~~[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|~~LotLE]]~~<~~/font>×<font~~ ~~color~~="~~darkred" size="-2~~">[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|talk]]</~~font~~> 02:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Comment''': This concept seems to show up on [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=%22Cascade-correlation+algorithm%22&btnG=Search Google scholar with 472 cites]. Taking a look at some of these might provide information to flesh out this article. [[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|<span style="color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk</span>]] 02:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep'''. This article has enough information to exist on its own. Furthermore, the topic is interesting. Non-notability should be less of an issue as this article may not be particularly popular, given the specialized topic, however, it does provideuseful information that some users would enjoy. Wikipedia is not a paper. As such there is essentially limitless space to provide useful information. Going in depth on topics will only add to the value of Wikipedia to users. [[User:Nlsanand\|Nlsanand]] 05:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep'''. This article has enough information to exist on its own. Furthermore, the topic is interesting. Non-notability should be less of an issue as this article may not be particularly popular, given the specialized topic, however, it does provideuseful information that some users would enjoy. Wikipedia is not a paper. As such there is essentially limitless space to provide useful information. Going in depth on topics will only add to the value of Wikipedia to users. [[User:Nlsanand\|Nlsanand]] 05:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' ''"no citable info, just a .pdf file"'' So since when have PDFs not been citable? Seems to warrant an article IMO [[User:MichaelBillington\|Michael Billington]] ([[User talk:MichaelBillington\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/MichaelBillington\|contribs]]) 11:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Line 24:		Line 24:
	*'''Keep''' - Referenced, encyclopaedic. Notability is a terrible criterion in Math, Science and the like [[User:WilyD\|WilyD]] 13:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' - Referenced, encyclopaedic. Notability is a terrible criterion in Math, Science and the like [[User:WilyD\|WilyD]] 13:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' - Comes up during any introductory course on neural networks and introduces significant changes to these. Also, the topic recently has been getting attention in the field of modelling cognitive development.[[User:blackvoid\|blackvoid]] 15:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' - Comes up during any introductory course on neural networks and introduces significant changes to these. Also, the topic recently has been getting attention in the field of modelling cognitive development.[[User:blackvoid\|blackvoid]] 15:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' - I think this stands up as an independent article. It could use some expansion, such as graphics illustrating the algorithm and more specific explanation of how it works, but that can happen with time. The expanded version I'd want would be too long for inclusion in whole in Arificial neural networks (but a "see also" between them would certainly be relevant). ~~<font color="darkgreen">~~[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|~~LotLE]]~~<~~/font>×<font~~ ~~color~~="~~darkred" size="-2~~">[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|talk]]</~~font~~> 17:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)		*'''Keep''' - I think this stands up as an independent article. It could use some expansion, such as graphics illustrating the algorithm and more specific explanation of how it works, but that can happen with time. The expanded version I'd want would be too long for inclusion in whole in Arificial neural networks (but a "see also" between them would certainly be relevant). [[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|<span style="color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters\|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk</span>]] 17:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
	*'''Keep''' or at the very least '''Merge''' . I don't know how you get as few as 472 google hits. I found the entry useful.		*'''Keep''' or at the very least '''Merge''' . I don't know how you get as few as 472 google hits. I found the entry useful.
	:''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>		:''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>