Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luckysort


 * 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. per WP:SNOW v/r - TP 01:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Luckysort

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The only reference is apparently a WP:PRIMARY source, the NIST guy that wrote the entry (Paul E. Black). Not every joke in a computer science reference is notable. I'm not seeing secondary coverage here. FuFoFuEd (talk) 07:25, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * delete I just did a search for several of these ineffective sorts while working on the afD for bogosort. I was unable to find any notable usage of Luckysort in actual programming or educational materials outside of the NIST entry as well. I Jethrobot (talk) 08:02, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete No decent source and not notable and not even interesting. Dmcq (talk) 08:41, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  — Reaper Eternal (talk) 10:25, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Lack of sources (I found 0 more). Clear case. Widefox (talk) 19:48, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't think the NIST entry is adequate by itself for notability, so unless other sources turn up (and I searched Google books and Google scholar without finding any) I think this should go. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:40, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Looks like an inside joke that's not really funny, and certainly not notable. Justin W Smith talk/stalk 23:59, 23 June 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.