Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leave-one-out error

: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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. I considered redirecting, but I do not think this is a legitimate search term as this topic is a new term from a single journal article that does not appear to have caught on. If somebody disagrees and feels the need to create a redirect, feel free to do so. Malinaccier (talk) 19:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

=[[:Leave-one-out error]]=

:{{la|1=Leave-one-out error}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Leave-one-out error}})

This article does not belong in an encyclopedia. It appears that what is described in the article does not correlate one-to-one with the title of the article. The article describes "stability" of leave-one-out error, whereas the title of the article is leave-one-out error. The title could be changed appropriately, to "stability of leave-one-out error", but then it would be even more clear that an article like this does not belong in an encyclopedia. Looking at WP:NOT, Wikipedia is just not supposed to be a textbook or a scientific journal, where this article might belong. It is too technical, it does not sufficiently define the math terms, and is overall unreadable. Even for someone who is relatively familiar with this method, this article just does not convey anything meaningful. A reader who wants to learn about this in such detail will not look in an encyclopedia, they will look in research papers and textbooks on the method.

Manyyassin (talk) 16:35, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Manyyassin (talk)

Delete inscrutable article. "Leave-one-out cross validation" is discussed at Cross-validation (statistics)#Leave-one-out cross-validation; I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a different name for that concept, or something else. The only google hits for "leave one out error" (specifically) seem to be about a different topic in machine learning. Walsh90210 (talk) 16:52, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Cross-validation_(statistics)#Leave-one-out_cross-validation ~~Delete~~: this is a half-hashed synopsis of [https://doi.org/10.1007/s10444-004-7634-z the sole reference], which is a journal article that proposes the definitions that are here but not in Cross-validation (statistics)#Leave-one-out cross-validation. WP:NOTTEXTBOOK. — MarkH₂₁^talk 18:50, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
:Switched to redirect, since that’s an obvious alternative. — MarkH₂₁^talk 18:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Comment The delsort notice does not belong at the top of the AfD. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 00:22, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Delete Unclear, redundant article with a title that is an evident neologism. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 00:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. — MarkH₂₁^talk 01:23, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Cross-validation_(statistics)#Leave-one-out_cross-validation: where it is already described in as much detail as is encyclopedically warranted. Owen× ☎ 17:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

: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.