Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concept drift

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. Consensus is for the article to be retained. Further discussion regarding the article's content can continue on its talk page, if desired. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:16, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Concept drift[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Unsourced, a gazillion external links, reads like an essay not an encyclopedia article. Needs TNT. Roxy, the naughty dog. wooF 06:21, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep per SK#3 as the page has plenty of sources. For example, the first inline citation is to Basseville and Nikiforov 1993. Andrew D. (talk) 13:07, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 14:32, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 23:19, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 23:19, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The sources and links suggest notability and verifiability. It seems to need clean-up of the external links in the text etc., but AfD is not for clean-up. Cnilep (talk) 01:36, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep an extraordinarily low-quality article, but there are references (even inline ones! just not using <ref></ref> syntax). [1] is a higher-quality introduction. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:26, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Cut down, removing sections "Examples", "Datasets" and "Meetings", moving the list of reviews at the end onto the talk page for someone to use in creating something better-sourced. I think the rest could stay after some reference rescue. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:27, 5 December 2018 (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.