Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thurs statistical function
Appearance
- Retain.I (DrDBKarron) have the attention of Prof Powell now and he and his wife are now editing this piece and pulling together citations in peer reviewed literature.
Dbkarron (talk) 00:23, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thurs statistical function (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article cites two articles with seven and eleven citations in GScholar, respectively, which is not enough to establish notability. Moreover, it does not have references for the bulk of its text, which is written in the first person plural, suggesting either plagiarism or original research. I tried a web search to find references, but I couldn't find any. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 15:15, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:35, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. per nominator. Also, article is atrociously written. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:51, 12 January 2014 (UTC).