Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bogosort

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

This article fails to meet the relevant notability guideline. (See also WP:NOT Wikipedia:NOTTEXTBOOK Wikipedia:NOTESSAY). If this page was noteworthy for educational use, it would be referenced by text books and other educational material. There are no reference that indicate this idea is being used as notable educational topic. Bill C. Riemers, PhD. (talk) 16:06, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Mentioned in Eric S. Raymond's The New Hacker’s Dictionary, the NIST Dictionary of Algorithms and Data Structures and a paper published in a volume of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Probably sufficient to establish notability, unlike sleep sort. —Ruud 21:06, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Entries in a couple of dictionaries and one brief mention in a not very notable paper do not establish notability. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:13, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- For completeness sake, Wikipedia should in my opinion cover all entries in the NIST DADS. —Ruud 21:17, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The first two are just dictionaries, which Wikepedia is not a dictionary WP:NOT. While the conference lecture published in LNCS does have merit, there are millions of professional lectures and articles published every year. 24.716 articles where published in LNCS in 2007. ^[1]. A single publish reference is not sufficient to establish noteworthiness, unless the algorithm itself is actually somehow noteworthy.24.36.199.169 (talk) 21:32, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]