Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Capillary routing


 * 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   merge to Multipath routing. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:00, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Capillary routing

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable research topic (see talk page for lit review). Basically five papers published within months of each other, each with a slightly different take on the same idea. Most-cited paper received 6 citations. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 23:39, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 00:19, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 00:19, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Merge to appropriate article. The information in such sources should be nice to have somewhere, but it seems they all stem from the same research group, so we have no secondary usage of the term. -- cyclopia speak! 09:46, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:47, 15 September 2013 (UTC)




 * Merge to Multipath routing with a redirect. The topic gets 42 hits on Gscholar, not a lot. The papers mentioned by the nom look peer reviewed to me, so count as reliable sources. But the field seems too new or too specialized for independent sources needed for neutrality and notability. Since the topic is verifiable in RS, it is better to merge content rather than outright deletion, per WP:PRESERVE. As capillary routing is an optimization algorithm for spread routing in the context of multi-path routing, Multipath routing seems the best target. A redirect is warranted as well, since this is a reasonable search term. There is no prejudice to recreation of this article should multiple independent reliable sources become available. --Mark viking (talk) 03:29, 16 September 2013 (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.