Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monkey (elasticity)

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, WP:SNOW--Ymblanter (talk) 09:13, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Monkey (elasticity)

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

Not a notable phenomenon... a minor comment in a minor publication, and not much more. UtherSRG (talk) 23:44, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

delete Something between an essay and a spot of trivia, not sure what; but definitely not an encyclopedia article. Mangoe (talk) 00:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Rlendog (talk) 01:01, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. At best a random fact that belongs elsewhere, at worst (given the poor-quality references) simply wrong. We don't reference biology articles with things from 1839 or 1888, and having cartilage is not unique to monkeys. -- 120.17.127.184 (talk) 02:01, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - after having a WTF moment (what is "behave in an elastic way"?), I guess this is some pseudo-philosophical essay about... monkeys (?). The keyword being "essay". Tigraan (talk) 09:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete some articles I spend hours wrestling with should it be in wikipedia or not. this is not one of those articles, easy delete call for me. Bryce Carmony (talk) 11:13, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Any quality content on the subject could be incorporated into existing articles on monkey anatomy or behavior, but I see nothing here that merits such. --Animalparty-- (talk) 16:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete i'll endeavour to look for additional material of the anatomical aspect for possible future inclusion to the main article. Whalestate (talk) 20:24, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - if information about the subject was notable, it could be included in Monkey; however, I disagree that such information should be included even there. Inks.LWC (talk) 02:29, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Joseph2302 (talk) 00:52, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Notable? Not in a million years. AlbinoFerret 18:48, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:09, 2 April 2015 (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.