Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Optical properties of selenium: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
answering |
|||
Line 11:
::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)
*'''Strong keep''', This article is part of the work done by wikimedians of the levant user-group, through its version of the Education program. The article is mainly contributed by Mousa Jafar (a 68 y old Prof.), a leading scientist in his field. We were really lucky that he even gave us the time to write that stub for Wikipedia. The article was intended to be about '''Physical properties of selenium''' (which is a huge deal in right now). It was renamed into '''Optical properties of selenium''' by WikiDan61 ( a move that I did not event try to argue with at the time). Prof. Mousa released some charts from his work under CC, and he is already preparing for a few other articles. Prof. Mosa is not a Wikipedian, and he is not after a "single page (stub) citation" fame and for sure he is not into the "'''hang a bunch of citations to the author's own papers'''" argument, you can simply refer to References to check that. lets all [[WP:AGF|AGF]], especially in a retiring Prof. He was welcomed with a [[WP:BITE|BITE]] simply cause he had no idea how to talk balk on the wiki system, and his work is being undermined by my fellow Wikipedias, whom mostly have no idea what is the article is really about. The stub is bombed by '''COI''', and at the same time by '''too technical''' templates! and then finally by this '''AFD'''. The stub is a legit work, it is a perfect contribution for a content that address a very important field. --[[User:Tarawneh|Tarawneh]] ([[User talk:Tarawneh|talk]]) 19:02, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
:: Thanks for taking the time to explain. It was clearly a good user group experience. However, as far as the article is concerned, we're just of the opinion that an element's properties belong with the element's article. And since we think some of the cited material may be useful over at the main article, we're arguing for a merge not a delete. [[User:Chiswick Chap|Chiswick Chap]] ([[User talk:Chiswick Chap|talk]]) 19:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
| |||