Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ligase chain reaction

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The result was Withdrawn, non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!)} 18:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ligase chain reaction[edit]

The context doesn't make it clear what this article's about, it seems far too specialized, it has no listed sources or references, and the last sentence makes me suspect it's a copyvio of a textbook. Reyk _YO! 05:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw Nomination - DGG's salvaged it. Well done. Reyk _YO! 11:34, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SPEEDY DELETE. Blatant copyvio. Article has been tagged accordingly. =Axlq 06:16, 30 July 2008 (UTC) Good work. =Axlq 14:14, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. Yes, and the first paragraph of the article is pulled straight from here. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. I didn't bother checking before DGG fixed the copyvio, but now I see that it's so notable I'm not going any further than this, this, and that. I don't even need to check out the hits to be convinced. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:03, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

keep as rewritten certainly notable, and very far indeed from being overspecialised, so i rewrote the lede completely, deleted the rest, and added some references to get things started. EC with Someguy suggesting that on my talk page. DGG (talk) 07:54, 30 July 2008 (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.