Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Statistically improbable phrase

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:56, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Statistically improbable phrase (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)

Notability. Statistically improbable phrases are a relatively generic concept, but apparently has been usurped by Amazon as an official analysis they invented. I can see no reason Amazon's particular commercial application of the idea of statistically improbable phrases is noteworthy. Louiedog (talk) 18:34, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Louiedog (talk) 18:34, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. If it is a generic concept then it deserves an article. If Louiedog thinks it is too much about Amazon, then they can edit the article - it is not a reason for deletion. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 21:28, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • That is a reasonable point. It's just that somehow wikipedia decided this was Amazon's thing and as a result, SIP as a Amazon feature has usurped a lot of Google search space. Is there an argument for de-hijacking the meaning of an article away from the apparent more common internet usage? Anyway, I guess I'll start.--Louiedog (talk) 13:28, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and withdraw. As per RHaworth's suggestion, I've edited the article to reflect a more generalized use of the word.--Louiedog (talk) 13:44, 7 September 2015 (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.