Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Accelerated Curing of Concrete Pipe:
- 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 concrete curing. MBisanz talk 01:39, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Accelerated Curing of Concrete Pipe:[edit]
- Accelerated Curing of Concrete Pipe: (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This is an original research essay. Seems to be a how-to guide. Tavix (talk) 22:54, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Creator understands concrete but not how Wikipedia works. Should contribute to existing articles until he gets the feel of it. Looie496 (talk) 23:30, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Partial merge with Concrete or userfy. Article has several issues, but isn't all how-to guide. Part of it could be saved and the process is probably encyclopedic enough to a point that the article would be worth keeping if he worked on it a little more, hence my !vote.. - Mgm|(talk) 23:12, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Concrete curing or merge both (in due course) with Concrete. Lots of useful information, which is cited in this article's companion, Concrete curing. Obviously the existence of that article gives another target for merging, shows another article that might need to be merged, and brings up more issues about the article under discussion and its author. ConcreteCuring says that he is new to WP and there are no obvious signs of bad faith. There are issues about the cites in 'Concrete curing'. Note that these issues exist on Concrete also, see File:Curing-concrete-columns.jpg by Builder Bill; a good example of a user who is so useful we have incentive to not challenge potential advertising issues. User: ConcreteCuring on the other 2 articles seems to be less involved; the contributions are less useful. Anarchangel (talk) 20:07, 12 January 2009 (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.