Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medawar zone

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. Term seems to have received sufficient coverage/usage in additional sources (non-admin closure) Nosebagbear (talk) 09:16, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Medawar zone

[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)

Not noticed outside of a single obscure paper with vanishingly few independent citations. jps (talk) 16:02, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, appears to be a well used term/concept going by the number of books/papers that discuss/refer to it ie. Individual-based Modeling and Ecology, Thinking Strategically: Power Tools for Personal and Professional Advancement, Hammer or Tongs: How Best to Build Agent-Based Models? in Advances in Practical Applications of Agents, Multi-Agent Systems, and Complexity: The PAAMS Collection: 16th International Conference, PAAMS 2018, Into Complexity: A Pattern-oriented Approach to Stakeholder Communications, Integrating Short- and Long-Range Processes into Models: The Emergence of Pattern in Patterns of Land Degradation in Drylands, Becoming a Successful Early Career Researcher, Pattern-Oriented Modeling of Agent-Based Complex Systems: Lessons from Ecology in Science, and Choosing a Research Project. Coolabahapple (talk) 06:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This does appear to be a reasonably widespread term appearing in several books, research papers and popular sources. Those sources just need to be included as inline citations. Famousdog (woof)(grrr) 08:49, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I had already encountered this before in various papers by Grimm et al., and a Scholar search confirms my suspicion that the term has sufficient uptake. Needs more content and better sourcing, natch. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:03, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Obscure doesn't mean non-N. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:43, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on the sourcing uncovered by Coolabahapple Chetsford (talk) 18:03, 18 August 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.