Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mixing in Consumer Products

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 all. Tim Song (talk) 04:03, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mixing in Consumer Products

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

4 Hard to classify pages. They look like copyright violations, but I have been unable to indetify thesource for them. But a starting sentence like "Consumer products are divided into three categories: detergents, personal care products, and cosmetics." (from Mixing in Consumer Products) is unlikely to be used in a newly written, general article, and appears to come from some handbook. The images used are obvious violations though. Anyway, the subjects are of very limited notability, and have titles with sometimes little relation to the content (e.g. Mixing in Bulk Chemicals, which is about food.) The references are sometimes missing (Mixing in Mineral Processing) Fram (talk) 11:43, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated are:

Mixing in Bulk Chemicals
Mixing in the Oil and Gas Field
Mixing in Mineral Processing
Userfy all of these. I was actually fairly surprised to read this, which does in fact seem to contain interesting and informative discussions on how various products are mixed. These titles are not good, though, and the information contained here probably would serve better scattered on more notable subjects (e.g. our article on toothpaste does not contain a great deal of data on the ingredients used or how it is made.) Assuming this is not a copyvio, in which case all bets are off, I'm for preserving the text somehow. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:14, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:14, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: it appears that the author of these 4 articles was not notified of this nomination; I have notified him today, but I suggest that this discussion be kept open for a few extra days to give him an opportunity to respond. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:54, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Response: Hi Russ, I am new to wikipedia and am unsure of what is wrong with these articles. These articles were given to me by my supervisor and they are our property. The articles were written by the students of my supervisors and is entirely our work. All the work not considered "ours" have been sourced back to the original author of the handbooks or other sources. Please let me know. Thanks. (TheodoreNg (talk) 16:30, 7 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]

'Comment: I have changed the article on Bulk Chemical Mixing to Mixing in the Food Industry. I accidently put this article under the wrong title and another article under bulk chemicals will follow. (TheodoreNg (talk) 17:22, 7 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Strong delete Strong Delete All: WP:HOWTO, plus the articles are apparently "property" of a company, according to author (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete G12 per nom and TheodoreNg's admissions. I would strongly advise TheodoreNg to read these before copying any more of his property into Wikipedia:

SnottyWong talk 23:45, 8 June 2010 (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.