Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advanced Control of Respiration

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--Ymblanter (talk) 06:19, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced Control of Respiration[edit]

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

While this concept is at least a bit notable, as one can see from doing some searching, this doesn't really appear to pass the bar in terms of our general notability standards. There's also the issue of this topic being easily confused with artificial respiration in the context of medicine, rather than food preparation, which isn't good for our readers. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:46, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a commercial process offered by a company called Van Amerongen. Sources affiliated with that company are not independent and do not establish notability. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:37, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are no references in the article. This is a particular company's implementation of a controlled atmosphere for food storage. A google search leads to this description on the company website: "The laboratory project that underlies the practice implementation of Advanced Control of Respiration (ACR), Van Amerongen's dynamic storage technology, was realized through the support of "Topsectoren" and Innovation of the province of Gelderland (Netherlands)." The only other references to the term are also associated with the company. StarryGrandma (talk) 05:45, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:41, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:41, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now as I see no better links than this. SwisterTwister talk 05:11, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - some difficult to understand English and phrasing in the article, but even working through that morass, I cannot see any notability that meets WP:GNG Velella ^{Velella Talk} 13:46, 8 October 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.