Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quantification of randomness Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Quantification_of_randomness

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:09, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quantification of randomness

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

As per Bernoulli space and thers, a free mix of WP:OR and [[WP:S{AM]] by an editor whose company is the main listed source. Guy (Help!) 18:26, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 23:13, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 23:13, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as OR and spam. XOR'easter (talk) 23:31, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT. The title could be something interesting but the content is useless and vague twaddle with no valid sources. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:16, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete blatant WP:OR and promotion of primary source. I am in support of deleting all these OR articles by this user because they are all similar –Ammarpad (talk) 02:27, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:NOR. Smmurphy^(Talk) 02:16, 26 November 2017 (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.