Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adequately wet

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. Michig (talk) 07:44, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adequately wet

Adequately wet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete now and leave it to a dictionary to define. Resurrect it later if this needs more details. But this article does not quite belong here. I like to saw logs! (talk) 04:52, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - doesn't really even make for an appropriate DICDEF. It's just a glossary term (one of many such technical terms) from an official report. Just two words someone has put together to describe something that might otherwise take the paragraph that current forms the article. What next? Sufficiently dry or Appropriately moist? St★lwart¹¹¹ 09:06, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:40, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:40, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - agree that it fails notability. PianoDan (talk) 15:34, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete on the ground that other articles can easily incorporate the content of this article. Not independently notable. Andrew³²⁷ 07:13, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is not an encyclopedic title (though asbestos, handling of etc etc obviously is); this is just an adjectival phrase, not even deserving of a dictionary entry. Imaginatorium (talk) 19:21, 25 December 2014 (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.