- 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 keep. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 18:01, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Adjoint filter
- Adjoint filter ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unsourced since fucking forever, no sources found. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 19:05, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the
list of Science-related deletion discussions.
North America
1000 04:38, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
- Maybe you should read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Wikietiquette before participating in any more deletion discussions. -- Colapeninsula ( talk) 10:27, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter ( talk) 15:56, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Fuckingmerge tofuckingHermitian adjoint. Since Xor'easter found somefuckingsources, this seems at least mildlyfuckingnotable, but not overly so on its own; it seems like just a specialfuckingcase of thefuckingadjoint operator on . -- DeaconFuckingVorbis ( talk) 00:59, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep - Now sourced. Thanks XOR'easter. ~ Kvng ( talk) 15:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep - Sourced and meetings guidelines. -- Dane talk 18:28, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Multiple RS in the article and in a GScholar search show this concept exists in the signal processing and control theory literature. There is enough sourcing for a reasonable stub. Merging to Hermitian adjoint would also be fine. But deletion of verifiable content should be avoided per WP:ATD. -- Mark viking ( talk) 11:21, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 keep. -- Ed ( Edgar181) 18:01, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Adjoint filter
- Adjoint filter ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unsourced since fucking forever, no sources found. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 19:05, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the
list of Science-related deletion discussions.
North America
1000 04:38, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
- Maybe you should read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Wikietiquette before participating in any more deletion discussions. -- Colapeninsula ( talk) 10:27, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter ( talk) 15:56, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Fuckingmerge tofuckingHermitian adjoint. Since Xor'easter found somefuckingsources, this seems at least mildlyfuckingnotable, but not overly so on its own; it seems like just a specialfuckingcase of thefuckingadjoint operator on . -- DeaconFuckingVorbis ( talk) 00:59, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep - Now sourced. Thanks XOR'easter. ~ Kvng ( talk) 15:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep - Sourced and meetings guidelines. -- Dane talk 18:28, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Multiple RS in the article and in a GScholar search show this concept exists in the signal processing and control theory literature. There is enough sourcing for a reasonable stub. Merging to Hermitian adjoint would also be fine. But deletion of verifiable content should be avoided per WP:ATD. -- Mark viking ( talk) 11:21, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- 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.