- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 22:39, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- 3'-Cluster (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article, along with in vivo selection of an entire exon and exinct, seems to be intended solely to promote the research done by the team of some N.N. Singh. It thus contains only original research of little interest to the general public, besides not fulfilling Wikipedia's criteria of notability. kashmiri (talk) 11:26, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 12:30, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Not notable. Google search turned up nothing establishing notability. Seems to be promotional. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 18:04, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as original research. Reference is not an independent third party peer review. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 17:04, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.