Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regulatory feedback network


 * 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   no consensus. Light participation makes it difficult to discern any consensus at all. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  16:04, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Regulatory feedback network

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The topic "regulatory feedback network" seems to be a neologism (or repurposed phrase) due to Achler (the phrase is also used generically in many sources, not in the sense meant in the topic of this article), who also created the article based on his recent articles. There are no secondary sources that use this term in his sense, as far as I can find, so no evidence that the concept is notable. Probably the concept deserves a paragraph in neural networks or some such place, not an article. See the talk page; the cited "secondary" sources do not seem to mention "regulatory feedback network" or anything similar. Dicklyon (talk) 08:39, 23 December 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 00:30, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisting comment. The debate wasn't sorted so a second relist is reasonable. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. If it is used in many senses, explain them all. If it is not used at all in his sense, omit it and include the others.    DGG ( talk ) 04:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment this might be one of those situations where canvassing is appropriate, as 99% of the people looking at this have absolutely no idea what the hell it means. This needs experts in the field to judge its notability. I recommend we ask contributors to similar articles what they think.--CastAStone//₵₳$↑₳₴₮ʘ№€ 15:36, 13 January 2010 (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.