Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edgewood Arsenal experiments
- 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 SPEEDY KEEP. Alexbrn talk|contribs|COI 22:26, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Edgewood Arsenal experiments (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)
These experiments, if they happened at all, appear to have no coverage in reliable secondary sources and thus the topic is not sufficiently notable for WP. Alexbrn talk|contribs|COI 16:26, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Withdrawn by nominator. Other editors have found good sources (thanks everyone). Alexbrn talk|contribs|COI 21:57, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and clean up. I did not write this article, I was working to clean it up when I saw this. The experiments did happen and are sufficiently documented in NAS books going back to the 1980s as well as more recent academic books and memoirs. There was a lot of rubbish in the article, including a big confusion between these experiments, Project MKUltra and Project 112. There is still some, but it's not as hopeless as Operation Red Hat was, mainly because there is no edit warring going on. (Project 112 is in a similar situation where the amount of clean up required is not too great.) 86.121.18.17 (talk) 17:00, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:01, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:01, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:01, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:01, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Article needs to be improved, but I see plenty of reliable sources, including from both the government and NBC News. A good topic and useful article. Rationale for deletion is incorrect. - Who is John Galt? ✉ 20:08, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and improve Article is referenced, incorrect rationale as per above. Kaini (talk) 20:48, 18 June 2013 (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.