Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natural Earth projection

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 keep. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:00, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Natural Earth projection[edit]

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

Non-notable recently created map projection, may not meet General Notability Guideline, all sources are primary. Pokajanje|Talk 05:21, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. There are several peer-reviewed publications by Patterson et al., although citations are a bit thin. -- 120.23.166.5 (talk) 11:40, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If the creator of the projection is involved, does that not make those articles primary? Pokajanje|Talk 15:42, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. It's a borderline case, but there have been several publications without Patterson's name on them, though all by people who have worked with Patterson. My feeling is that something that has been the subject of several peer-reviewed journal papers by different scientists probably should be given the benefit of doubt. It has adequate references and is not a case of self-promotion, so I don't see what would be accomplished by deleting the article. --Sammy1339 (talk) 19:24, 31 October 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.