Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evolutionary Polynomial Regression

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--Salix alba (talk) 11:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Evolutionary Polynomial Regression

Evolutionary Polynomial Regression (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

non-notable subject. Prod was removed citing an article. However, "Evolutionary Polynomial Regression" only generates 40 Ghits[1] (including the Wikipedia article itself) and most of those hits refer to articles by one single person, Orazio Giustolisi. There are no links to this page, which has remained a stub for quite some time. Hence, I propose that this page be deleted. Crusio (talk) 14:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

• delete promotional, rather than informative article. The paper this article is based on has been cited a mere two times in the ISI database, one of which is a self-citation. It might be possible to write an encyclopedia article on the idea (it's sort of reminiscent of this idea), but this is simply use of Wikipedia to promote an idea with no demonstrable impact in the outside world. Pete.Hurd (talk) 14:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
• delete I concur with nom. and Pete.Hurd; non-notable promotional article. Tim Ross·^talk 15:30, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. The entire text of the article, absent its single reference, is:
  
  Evolutionary Polynomial Regression (EPR) is an analytical approach which offers a range of benefits when seeking to quantify relationships; it does not require prior knowledge of the form of the relationship, and ‘sifts’ through potential causal attributes identifying those which have the greatest relevance to the observed outputs.
  
  This seems typical of the method. You choose a three word phrase with TLA potential, selecting words that sound precisely scientific or mathematical. The actual description of the great discovery is verbal mush: abstract to the point of evasiveness, and ultimately yields little meaning. I too suspect that this is promotional in intent. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
• Ask your doctor if Evolutionary Polynomial Regression is right for you. Mandsford (talk) 00:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. RogueNinja_talk 08:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

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.