Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Modeling point processes in R
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
- 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. Jayjg (talk) 02:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Modeling point processes in R (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article is basically nothing more than a vehicle for the mention of the package 'spatstat'. With that title, a reasonable article would risk becoming a how-to guide. Notability of both the software and the methodology is beyond question, but notability of the joint topic as the article is about is slim to none. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 20:57, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Seems like a non-notable library add-on to a semi-notable programming language. Mattg82 (talk) 00:02, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. The authors of the package have had a journal article published about it ("spatstat: An R Package for Analyzing Spatial Point Patterns"), but I don't know enough about the field to judge whether this implies notability. EALacey (talk) 15:45, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Whatever else this is, it has no context that identifies the subject of the article. It begins: There has been a major effort to develop libraries for R to carry out point process analysis. There are a number of libraries available for the analysis of multidimensional point processes. This may also violate WP:NOTHOWTO, but it's hard to say. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 17:13, 23 December 2009 (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.