Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Weak Heap
I've expanded the article. As the subject of multiple nontrivial independent research articles (with double-digit citations) as well as a secondary source (quite rightly chosen as the main source by the article creator) it clearly passes . As for NOTDICT, it is being badly abused here by both the nominator and {{u|GabeIglesia}}. That guideline is about not having articles about words and their definitions, but should say nothing about having articles about abstract concepts that happen to include definitions of those concepts. Or otherwise, how could we have articles about anything mathematical at all? We miight as well give up and be the encyclopedia of celebrities, sportspeople, and film stars
— User:David, 05:06, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)