- 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 16:39, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
- Variability function ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This appears to be WP:SYN. It is basically the work of one user, who has written several closely-related articles. The principal source cited in these articles is Elart von Collani, who runs a company called Stochastikon. The company name matches the username of the article author. Who has never, as far as I can see, edited any article without including a reference to Elart von Collani. Guy ( Help!) 00:48, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
- Support for all of these connected nominations; they all form one big walled garden of original research with no independent verifiability. I've been meaning to nominate these myself for months and just haven't felt able to commit the time to see it through.- Bryanrutherford0 ( talk) 03:18, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
- Delete with all the rest of the walled garden for all the reasons stated above. XOR'easter ( talk) 02:19, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter ( talk) 02:20, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter ( talk) 02:20, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- Delete'. As above. Xxanthippe ( talk) 02:26, 21 November 2017 (UTC).
- Delete. Junk and original research like the rest of this walled garden. — David Eppstein ( talk) 03:40, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- Delete blatant WP:OR and promotion of primary source. I am in support of deleting all these OR articles by this user because they are all similar. The AfDs should've been bundled together. – Ammarpad ( talk) 02:31, 25 November 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 delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 16:39, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
- Variability function ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This appears to be WP:SYN. It is basically the work of one user, who has written several closely-related articles. The principal source cited in these articles is Elart von Collani, who runs a company called Stochastikon. The company name matches the username of the article author. Who has never, as far as I can see, edited any article without including a reference to Elart von Collani. Guy ( Help!) 00:48, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
- Support for all of these connected nominations; they all form one big walled garden of original research with no independent verifiability. I've been meaning to nominate these myself for months and just haven't felt able to commit the time to see it through.- Bryanrutherford0 ( talk) 03:18, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
- Delete with all the rest of the walled garden for all the reasons stated above. XOR'easter ( talk) 02:19, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter ( talk) 02:20, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter ( talk) 02:20, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- Delete'. As above. Xxanthippe ( talk) 02:26, 21 November 2017 (UTC).
- Delete. Junk and original research like the rest of this walled garden. — David Eppstein ( talk) 03:40, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- Delete blatant WP:OR and promotion of primary source. I am in support of deleting all these OR articles by this user because they are all similar. The AfDs should've been bundled together. – Ammarpad ( talk) 02:31, 25 November 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.