Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stochastic prediction procedure Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Stochastic_prediction_procedure

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) 16:38, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stochastic prediction procedure

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

WP:OR by an author whose name identifies him as the author of the two cited sources. Now down to one. Originally three, but one was a predatory open access publisher and the second turns out to be a journal founded by the author and published at the time of this paper by a predatory open access publisher. Guy (Help!) 00:59, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support for all of these connected nominations; they all form one big walled garden of original research with no independent verifiability. I've been meaning to nominate these myself for months and just haven't felt able to commit the time to see it through.-Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 03:18, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for the same reason given at WP:AFD/Stochastic measurement procedure: self-promotion of non-notable research. XOR'easter (talk) 23:38, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 23:38, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 23:38, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as above. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:24, 21 November 2017 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. Junk and original research like the rest of this walled garden. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:38, 21 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.