Deletion of Three forms of mathematical induction

Comment: The article is not bad and is understandable, but I am concerned about .  I've never heard the term "three forms of mathematical induction
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR)

Comment: as the selection of the three forms is .  (This is an oddity, as I see it.  All of the article could be merged into different articles.)  My suggestion would be to find a good name for the 2nd form, and keep that as a separate article, merging all the rest into Mathematical induction.  Specifically -- forms 1 and 2 are the same '''type''' of induction, with the difficulties in different steps, while form 3 is '''different'''.  They should not all be in the same article without including a number of of still different forms.  Furthermore, the triangle inquality miscounts "n".  The step that is impossible is '''2''' to '''3''', rather than '''1''' to '''2''', as the trivial equation is d \left( x_1,x_1 \right) \leq 0.  (In other words, I agree with
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: Polya's example and perhaps the product rule example into mathematical induction or some article on logical fallacy or erroneous proof. Delete the rest, as it is redundant or too detailed (maybe put into a Wikibook on proof techniques?). This article is too basic to appeal to readers who fully understand induction already. I also agree about the  problem; I have never seen this classification before, there are no sources, and there is no reason given to single out these three forms of induction from others possible
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)