Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gravitational search algorithm

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. Cirt (talk) 00:10, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gravitational search algorithm

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

References given all seem to be by the primary author and no secondary sources are given. This is a possible case of self-promotion. At the least, notability has not been established. RDBury (talk) 12:48, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I tried to flag WP:Conflict of interest and a few other issues by the creator (and probable sole contributor) three times, but first creator and then an anonymous IP editor have removed them each time without resolving the problem. This isn't reason for deletion of itself of course, but worth noting. MuffledThud (talk) 13:30, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:40, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There seems to be one independent secondary source that actually contains non-trivial coverage on the topic: see [1], pages 183–186. However, I don't think this is enough. Something first introduced in 2009 is simply too recent; time will tell whether it was a notable invention. This article can be re-created if the concept turns out to be notable. — Miym (talk) 15:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - lack of notability, but also WP:COI concerns as the sources and attribution in the text seem to be from the main contributor.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 23:00, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Recent research referenced only from primary sources. Pcap ping 06:49, 24 January 2010 (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.