Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cascade correlation algorithm: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
On Google
Keep
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)

Revision as of 11:08, 28 August 2006

Not notable, only 472 google hits, no citable info, just a .pdf file, no evidence of notability — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmaguir1 (talkcontribs) 2006-08-28 02:30:30