Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Optical properties of selenium: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
Line 16:
::::That's essentially what I was referring to in that there's nothing really in the article itself that's feasible for a merge. [[User:Kingofaces43|Kingofaces43]] ([[User talk:Kingofaces43|talk]]) 17:40, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
:::::The ''Wikipedia article'' that currently exists has little to merge, but the ''references'' from there may be useful. [[User:Tigraan|<span style="font-family:Tahoma;color:#008000;">Tigraan</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Tigraan|<span title="Send me a silicium letter!" style="color:">Click here to contact me</span>]]</sup> 18:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
*'''Merge''' into [[Selenium]] by a knowledgeable and impartial editor, as some of the citations in [[Optical properties of selenium]] may be worth keeping. <b>~</b> <
* '''Merge''' as above. The evident COI in 6 of the citations indicates the likelihood of bias and indeed overtechnicality. The properties of a thing are, well, core to its being and equally core to the main article, which is [[selenium]]. We won't need to talk much about the properties, just to name and cite them, and the main article is the place for that. By the way, nom, a merger doesn't require to be brought to AfD. [[User:Chiswick Chap|Chiswick Chap]] ([[User talk:Chiswick Chap|talk]]) 18:25, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
::6 out of 16 is evident COI. if the article was writen by any other person, it will still refer to these exact six citations. it is like saying there are too many Hawking citations in the black hole radiation article! --[[User:Tarawneh|Tarawneh]] ([[User talk:Tarawneh|talk]]) 19:06, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
| |||