[Brightcolours]

I have seen you write that before, but it remains (mostly) incorrect.
The main reason Sony has higher DR in RAW is not because they filter noise, it is because of how/where the signals get amplified. They simply have lower read out noise.

Canon has caught up with that somewhat (see 5D mk IV, EOS R for instance). And the Canon 1D X mk III does better (DR wise at base ISO) than the Nikon D6 and Sony A9 II.

The high DR is in low ISO, not in high ISO with NR.

That with some cameras/some camera settings noise gets filtered out at low light/long exposure/high ISO settings has nothing at all to do with high DR in low ISO setting RAWS.

"(mostly) incorrect" is debatable obviously.

Yes, Sony and Nikon read out is structured differently at the hardware level, and therefore generates less readout noise, I am aware of that. However, the processing in hardware is different too, resulting in files that look cleaner and appear to have lower noise levels, but lose some detail caused mostly by the in-hardware algorithms used.

The articles I mentioned were scientific papers, in which the sensors and electronics were taken apart and measurements were done at different output levels of the hardware itself. As to the starry sky shots: that was just an example (and done properly, they should be done at base iso). Star shots should be done with NR off as well.

Regards, Wim

You still appear to be conflating high ISO noise reduction (seen mostly years ago in the D3 era, concerning those scientific papers you are referring to) with higher DR at low ISO (where no NR is being applied). 
The high ISO NR also depends/ed on exposure time and/or high ISO NR being enabled or not. Making blanket statements about Sony/Nikon based on some vague memories of something you read in the past does not make for the most accurate posts.

So, mostly incorrect. 

Again: just because some manufacturer applied some NR at some high ISO setting at certain conditions, does NOT mean that the high DR at low/base ISO settings is a function of NR. It is not.

Photonstophotos analises  if NR has been applied, and shows that in its charts with a triangle pointing down.
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

As you can see, the Pentax K1 II does a lot of "cheating" in today's field of cameras.

---

About noise and Canon sensors I totally agree with WIM, Canon files might have more noise but they have more details and that's easily recognizable. from ISO 6400 and beyound my A6000 photos look watery as if airbrush was applied, I prefer by far the results from 7D2 and 750D despite being more noisy, especially the noise reduction applied to RAW can't be removed.

I'd look at what in your RAW processing causes the watery results, as it is not NR in RAW that does that.
Easily verifiable by looking at the dpreview sample image (RAW ISO 6400). If you compare it with the 7D mk II, you don't see watery results, just "sharper" more harsh noise. If you convert with software that does its own heavy NR you are not aware about, that would be an explanation of the "watery" results you see.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-a6000/12