Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Defining equation (physics)

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. ✗plicit 00:14, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Defining equation (physics)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Defining equation (physics) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

This articles fails WP:TONE, especially WP:NOTTEXTBOOK. I believe the least painful solution would be simply moving it to Wikibooks. Otherwise, I'm afraid the alternative would be to star over. fgnievinski (talk) 00:56, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

• Transwiki to Wikibooks, per nom. Brachy08 _(Talk) 01:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:43, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• Delete There's no evidence that "defining equation" is actually notable as a concept. This entire pile of words seems to boil down to the concept that "equations are used in physics to define things." Followed by a whole bunch of examples of equations used to define things. This strikes me as borderline tautological, and definitely not worth the effort of transwikiing. PianoDan (talk) 04:35, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
• Delete. Article is largely inspired by the textbook Whelan & Hodgson (1989) Essential Principles of Physics, which uses the concept of "Defining equation" heavily. I do not see that it would be used as a formal concept in many other sources. The page itself is messy, and would not benefit any project in its current state. --Jähmefyysikko (talk) 14:40, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

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.