Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Complexity paradox

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. Sandstein 08:30, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Complexity paradox

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

Fails GNG, started as a spam page, and now that the spamlinks have been removed, has no citations at all. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:39, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

75% delete It's not a complete invention of that blog, at least; found one article that also uses the term in this regard [1], but no more than that. Certainly doesn't seem to be in widespread use and sources actually defining it seem absent.-- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:28, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:29, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - A trivial or common-sense concept given a wordy title doesn't make it noteworthy. The phenomenon described here has little to do with complexity, and it is not a paradox. It's just someone's attempt at a witty observation. I wouldn't call it spam, though. Jergling (talk) 22:03, 19 September 2016 (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.