Deletion of Erdős–Bacon number (3rd nomination)

Comment: a |well-attested concept, somebody has to keep nominating this. |What the hell is the point
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:POINT)

Comment: WP:Notability is established by in-depth coverage, not incidental mentions or cobbled-together  arguments. I will admit that I was at first I was lead to suspect a notable topic here, by virtue of the sheer number of sources and the title of the http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/printedition/life/20070814/bl_cover14_side.art.htm second source employed in the article.  Someone clearly went through a lot of trouble to compile these sources and arrange them to suggest notability (without, I assume, understanding how and why such synthesis is discouraged on this project and cannot constitute notability in itself).  However, once I dug a little deeper, it became obvious that this is not really an independently notable topic.  Many of the sources employed in this article mention a Bacon number '''''or''''' an Erdős number.  A couple mention both the concept of the Bacon number and the Erdős number.  Exactly one source mentions the tandem "Erdős–Bacon number", and even then, it does so only incidentally, in one line
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)