Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fast calculation algorithm for discrete resonance-based band-pass 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 delete. I also am going to revert a couple of places where mention of this has been crammed into other articles, such as this and this. Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:48, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Fast calculation algorithm for discrete resonance-based band-pass filter

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:TOOSOON. Only source is the original paper. No evidence found that others have taken any note of this research, hence, no notability. SpinningSpark 16:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. The subject is certainly interesting but it has not been implemented anywhere, nor has it influenced others, yet. If the subject becomes notable, it will probably have a shorter name, perhaps discrete resonant band-pass filter or discrete resonant transformation, as suggested in the one source. We don't need to preserve this long name version. Binksternet (talk) 18:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I could find no independent reliable sources or any secondary sources at all. Hence it fails notability criteria, per WP:GNG. I agree, far WP:TOSOON. --Mark viking (talk) 19:10, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. The article creator has posted the following message on the article talk page. SpinningSpark 22:38, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I will be adding additional details to make it understandable to non-experts, in few hours. Please do not delete this article too soon. Thank you in advance, Hiiqit


 * Comment. I'll wait to see a few days if this can pass WP:HEY, but right now it looks like WP:OR. Bearian (talk) 00:38, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - the research article was published less than two months ago. Of course it is not going to have lots of cites, and of course WP:GNG is not passed. Tigraan Click here to contact me 14:32, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment. I am the author. I was not aware that additional sources should cite the article in order to be eligible for its own page, so please feel free to remove it (I would do it, but not sure about the correct procedure). I would disclose it shortly within another page that explains the related generic phenomena. Thank you for the involvement and the advices. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiiqit (talk • contribs) 00:42, 27 October 2016 (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.