Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/INFORMATION AND DATA ANALYSIS


 * 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 Speedy Deleted by Widr . (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 19:25, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

INFORMATION AND DATA ANALYSIS

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not encyclopedic, merely a recycling of the dust cover (copyvio?) and the contents page. Bazj (talk) 16:18, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-nbotable textbook, promotional tone, no refs.HappyValleyEditor (talk) 16:19, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:39, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:39, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:39, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete WP:CSD (unambiguous promotion), same as Articles for deletion/BUSINESS ENGLISH AND STUDY SKILLS. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:44, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete A textbook example of unambiguous promotion WP:CSD and probably has some copyright violations, too. --Mark viking (talk) 18:02, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as G11. Sam Sailor Talk! 18:38, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete This isn't Pearson Education editorEهեইдအ😎 18:52, 20 April 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.