Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bayes filter


 * 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   redirect to Recursive Bayesian estimation. T. Canens (talk) 03:25, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Bayes filter

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Content has been moved into Recursive Bayesian estimation, article ready for deletion Dondegroovily (talk) 04:16, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Recursive Bayesian estimation - I see no reason for deletion. Articles that have been merged into another should be redirected to assist readers in finding content. Additionally "Bayes filter" is an alternative term for "Recursive Bayesian estimation", therefore it is a plausable search term. I suggest that the nominator withdraw this AfD and redirect the article or notify me to redirect it. Rilak (talk) 01:10, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll do it as soon as this discussion is closed, unless of course, the decision is delete. Which seems unlikely. Dondegroovily (talk) 03:41, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't understand. Doesn't policy say that the nominator can withdraw an AfD if there is no support for deletion? And doesn't WP:MERGE say that after a merge, the merged article should be turned into a redirect instead of whatever is going on here? Could an adminitrator please close this AfD if it is inappropriate? Rilak (talk) 04:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sheesh, it's only been three hours since the first Redirect vote. Have some patience. Dondegroovily (talk) 04:20, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Please quote for me the relevant sections of WP:MERGE and WP:Merge and delete that supports your position and explain why. My understanding of the merge process is that the content is merged into an article and then the old article is generally redirected without being deleted first. You haven't given any reasons why this article should be deleted first other than it is redundant after the merge, which I believe fails WP:Merge and delete's requirements for exceptional circumstances. And this AfD is two days old, I think I can say that your proposal doesn't have much interest and/or support, so it can be closed as it is uncontroversial. Rilak (talk) 04:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Chill out dude, I'm somewhat new and still learning the wiki way. I even said that I would merge above. Isn't there a rule about biting that applies here? Dondegroovily (talk) 05:42, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy close WP:GFDL you need to redirect the page to preserve edit history. The page cannot be deleted. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 05:07, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It is done.Dondegroovily (talk) 02:51, 17 September 2010 (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.