Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internet 0

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. – Joe (talk) 14:31, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Internet 0

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This looks to be an academic project which never got wide attention. No independent references, no inline references, no claim of importance or significance, no commercial deployments, and nothing found in a Google search. power~enwiki (π, ν) 23:26, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:32, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Their 2004 Scientific American article has 681 citations according to gscholar. SpinningSpark 17:36, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academic journals-related deletion discussions. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 04:42, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 04:42, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Article definitely needs cleanup, but it does seem to be a notable concept per the above citations. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 04:43, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. François Robere (talk) 15:44, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KCVelaga (talk) 03:13, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As there is still reasonable balance between the justified !votes
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 22:48, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 02:08, 24 November 2018 (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.