Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Different Instruments for Different Equations


 * 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:08, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Different Instruments for Different Equations

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No evidence that this is a distinct topic, and it seems to belong elsewhere, not WP.  DGG ( talk ) 02:24, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:47, 3 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Wikibooks, maybe.  Note that the creator of this article created about two dozen very similar articles, at the rate of about one article per minute.  See .  Choor monster (talk) 14:54, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I have started this thread at ANI on the two dozen articles as a whole, since I don't know where to turn for mass deletion discussion. Choor monster (talk) 16:03, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I have replied to that thread but will reply here as well. I'm an academic and have gone through some of the texts cited in this article, so I'm quite familiar with these topics. While the present article is unfortunately named and perhaps could be merged into Simultaneous equations model, the vast majority of these articles are legitimate statistical topics, not mere textbook section titles. I strongly recommend against mass-deleting articles by what appears to be a relatively new user who's expending a lot of effort to filling a huge gap in modern statistical topics on Wikipedia. That he's a biochemist and writing articles based on multiple econometrics texts should tell you how widespread and notable these methods are. 50.153.133.158 (talk) 19:52, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Second comment: I've gone through his articles in more detail and some need to be reorganized or merged and at least a few are clear keeps. Someone, preferably someone from the statistics project, needs to approach this user and provide him with a few guidelines and to coordinate further contributions. I strongly think we need to stop harassing rare and knowledgeable contributors with deletion requests for their amateurish attempts to contribute to this site without any attempt to communicate with the user and/or to allow him to address the issues that may present. 50.153.133.158 (talk) 20:08, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - In its present form, this is not a reasonable article. Seems no way to use the material except by starting over from scratch. EdJohnston (talk) 15:52, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Might be plausible as a section in an article. Not an article as such.  Robert McClenon (talk) 16:42, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete all of this per WP:SNOW —Мандичка YO 😜 10:05, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Rename or merge a few articles, keep the rest, see above. 50.153.133.158 (talk) 19:56, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - There isn't much I can say that already hasn't been said above.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:22, 5 December 2015 (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.