Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spider Monkey Optimization

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. Consensus that this article doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Author can contact me if they'd like to do something else with the text. czar ⨹ 19:23, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Spider Monkey Optimization[edit]

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

DePRODed by author without addressing the issues. Concern was: Research paper or academic assignment. Partial very close paraphrasing of the sources. Contravenes WP:OR. The article is also a massive synthesis of COPYVIO and/or very close paraphrasing of the multiple cited sources. Furthermore, the comments left here would seem to confirm the creator's misunderstanding in good faith about what is allowed on Wikipedia. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:00, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:00, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:01, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki I think it is better if we don't delete it but move it to Wikiversity. It is the right place for this sort of research paper. What you think Kudpung? About close paraphrasing: Kudpung which sources are used? I can see almost every source is offline, do you have access to those sources? If so, we can WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM. Jim Carter 11:19, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't really have an opinion about moving it to another Foundation site. My main concern is that although it was probably pasted to Wikipedia in good faith, we are definitely not the venue for publishing original research or homework assignments. Add to that that the only real research the author did was to look for sources to use in his synthesis. If I were the prof assessing it I would expect more genuine research. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:50, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Kudpung: Are you aware that original research is allowed on Wikiversity? This sort of stuffs are welcomed at Wikiversity. So, yes, we can't keep it here but we can keep it there. What you think? Jim Carter (from public cyber) 17:48, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jim, as I said above, I have absolutely no opinion about where else this article could be used. My single concern is that it does not belong on en.Wiki. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:44, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about this for a while. Yes, we can't keep it here per WP:NOTESSAY. So I support delete if not transwiki. Jim Carter (from public cyber) 12:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete since this is, indeed, an essay. Drmies (talk) 03:02, 15 December 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.