Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neural Workflow Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Neural_Workflow

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 23:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neural Workflow

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

Recommend speedy deletion. Topic fails notability, Google books returns only four entries. The only external reference is a half-baked blog entry. The article is probably comprised only of original research. The text of the article is basically nonsense. Chandler321 (talk) 15:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is original research.Frmorrison (talk) 16:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- per nom, no RS coverage of this original research concept.Dialectric (talk) 11:23, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete—Insufficient WP:RS to establish notability. Lesser Cartographies (talk) 16:22, 16 September 2014 (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.