Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fractal space map


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 04:31, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Fractal space map

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested prod. The only source is a patent, and that's also the only thing that shows up under "fractal space map" in a Google Scholar search. Without reliable sources that are independent of the subject, the subject of the article is not presumed to be sufficiently notable. The anonymous IP who removed the prod tag did not address this concern, claiming without offering details that he found 2 hits in the ACM digital library and IEEE explore (which I was unable to reproduce). Sławomir Biały (talk) 23:06, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  — Sławomir Biały  (talk) 23:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. I did an exact phrase search for "fractal map" on the ACM digital library and got two hits.  The first of these  is pretty clearly irrelevant, and the second one  appears to be about visualization of high dimensional data by packing it into two dimensions (so not related to the subject of the article).  Sławomir Biały  (talk) 23:32, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete – article on a non-notable proprietary visualization technique, created by a single-purpose account, presumably the inventor of the technique. I could find no significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. While the search term "fractal map" does score scholarly hits, they are generally about other techniques that involve maps with some fractal aspect. --Lambiam 09:00, 13 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: I've worked with drill-downable reporting software and in some ways this seems to be an improvement over similar features in other programs. But I don't see the notability criteria being met at the moment even if there may be potential. WP isn't for advertising new products, no matter what merit they may have. The material on Hausdorff dimension seems ORish to me.--RDBury (talk) 17:51, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. A non-notable and minor variation of treemaps. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:29, 14 April 2011 (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.