Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biologically inspired algorithms

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 redirect to Bio-inspired computing. (non-admin closure) MrScorch6200 (talk | ctrb) 01:23, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Biologically inspired algorithms

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced list-like article about a rather haphazard collection of computer science techniques. Unless a reliable source can be found that establishes the notability of the category of "biologically inspired algorithms" per se, I don't see why this article should be kept. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 13:55, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Bio-inspired computing which has similar lists, but has references (or at least further readings), too. While there are 1,220 hits for "biologically inspired algorithms" on GScholar and the topic is likely notable, the article as it stands adds nothing to what is already in Bio-inspired computing. Users will be best served by a redirect to that article. No prejudice against an enterprising editor who wishes to develop the redirect on this topic into a proper article. --Mark viking (talk) 02:50, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. As Mark viking already said, this is definitely a notable topic but there is nothing in the nominated article worth keeping. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:33, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect (change of opinion). I should have done more searching before nominating. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 08:28, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Bio-inspired computing per Mark viking. -- 101.119.28.55 (talk) 13:04, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thiese might be useful references:

Neumann, Frank; Witt, Carsten (2010). Bioinspired computation in combinatorial optimization. Algorithms and their computational complexity. Natural Computing Series. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 978-3-642-16543-6. Zbl 1223.68002.
Brabazon, Anthony; O’Neill, Michael (2006). Biologically inspired algorithms for financial modelling. Natural Computing Series. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 3-540-26252-0. Zbl 1117.91030.

Deltahedron (talk) 07:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised you didn't add those to the article. I've done so. Michael Hardy (talk) 18:07, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't read them, so can hardly cite them as references for any of the content. Deltahedron (talk) 18:19, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect and merge into bio-inspired computing, and then consider whether to change the title of that article to "biologically inspired computing". Michael Hardy (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into bio-inspired computing per WP:SNOW.AioftheStorm (talk) 03:35, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.