Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Springer Materials - Online Database

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 merge to Landolt–Börnstein. Courcelles 03:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Springer Materials - Online Database

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

The subject matter lacks independent coverage, and is probably better suited as a section under Springer Science+Business Media. wctaiwan (talk) 14:26, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree, I'm not finding much in the way of independent non-trivial coverage of this. Qrsdogg (talk) 15:14, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. — I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} 16:50, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 21:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator makes mention that this would fit as a section of another article, so we need to consider a merge solution here. Courcelles 21:55, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - This is an online product of a very large scientific publisher Springer-Verlag. The product exists, and I'm sure it is worthwhile to engineers and their ilk, but I don't see a significant amount of secondary commentary on the product. Best solution is probably to merge it into Springer Science+Business Media. --Noleander (talk) 00:05, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
merge with Landolt–Börnstein. If you read the actual article, you will see that this is the online continuation of the former print Landolt-Börnstein, one of the most famous print databases in the world, and the standard reference for physical data, in several hundred volumes, owned by all libraries that can afford it. and listed in every reference work--e.g. Sheehy, Guide to Reference Books, item E167, , Malinowsky, Science and Engineering Literature, item 7-22, and I could go down my shelf of guides to the literature and find all the other entries, all of which give a full description better than the one given here in either article. It is incomprehensible to me that Springer was foolish enough to give the database a non-descript name when it had a famous well-known trademark name It , but many publishers did the same, e.g. renaming Chemical Abstracts as SciFinder . the unfortunate result, of course, is non-recognition. The combined article will need substantial rewriting and I will do it. Whether it should be titled as the current name or the famous name is an interesting question. We normally use the current name when a periodical changes title, but personally I think this is an error, and we should either use the best known name or make separate articles. I'll therefore do the merge under Landolt Bornstein. DGG ( talk ) 19:41, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as per DGG. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:10, 1 August 2011 (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.