Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chemical generation

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 keep. Daniel Bryant 08:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chemical generation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

While I can find many references to the term "Chemical generation" [1] none seem to have anything to do with a literary movement. This seems like original research. IrishGuy ^talk 19:34, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - There is a reference to "chemical fiction" in one of the external links. It seems plausible to me, although obscure. --Theunicyclegirl (talk, review me!) 20:13, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment one of the references refers to "chemical fiction" as a genre, but there I didn't see any references to a "chemical generation" as a literary movement. IrishGuy ^talk 20:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• This does have some usage: one of the Sarah Champion anthologies is subtitled "New Fiction from the Chemical Generation", and there's this and this. Those last two use scare quotes when talking about "chemical generation" writers, and this PhD student's research program has to explain the choice of "chemical generation" over other possible names, so the terminology may not have settled yet. I lean toward keep unless someone can suggest an appropriate redirect or merge, though. —Celithemis 22:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel Bryant 03:05, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• keep I translate chemical generation as the generation of those people who rely upon artificial chemicals for stimulation and recreation, though it is hard to tell the exact meaning. If the name doesn't stick, we can reconsider.DGG 06:49, 7 April 2007 (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.