Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Science and technology: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→[[Science and technology]]: keeep |
|||
Line 14:
:*'''Comment''' If there is merit, why delete it as opposed to fix it? It has been pointed out that there are several articles incorporating this term (which is more than its two parts). Additionally there are categories that do this as well; in a quick search I can find [[:Category:Science and technology by country]] (and this is full of many other sub categories of science and technology) and [[:Category:Science and technology studies]]. If you delete the article Science and technology, it will eventually be re-created. Why not deal with the content of the article now instead of later? -- [[User:MCG|MCG]] 14:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
::'''Comment''' Main article has been trimmed significantly to essentially stub-status. --[[User:ZimZalaBim|ZimZalaBim]] ([[User talk:ZimZalaBim|talk]]) 15:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' The question of alternative approaches and the benefit of [[incrementalism]] and "breakthrough" aka "spontaneous innovation", is quite an important subject in engineering and science. It is a bit like having an article on the trinity for religion in some ways they are considered the same thing, but in other ways they are very different. The term is used frequently enough to make it a potential article - so why not slap an { { undercontruction} } tag on it?--[[User:Haseler|Mike]] 16:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
| |||