Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of blade materials

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 keep‎. ✗plicit 02:34, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of blade materials[edit]

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

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

Information is trivial and it's set up to collect trivial information. Some of the info is LEAD is not trivial but there's no sourcing. The only sources that talk about this as a group are not reliable; it's mostly based on self-published work (not RS) and company info sheets (which have info about individual materials but not the group as a whole). I'm not saying it's not a notable topic because it could be, but I don't think there's anything currently on this page that meets our criteria for inclusion. I tried to make edits but I felt like I was just removing things because there weren't sources I felt like I could mine. This is my first time submitting an AfD so please correct me if I'm doing it wrong. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 00:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - AfD is not for clean up. Skyerise (talk) 01:09, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I have been using this article for reference while shopping for pocket knives for my own use. I have found it accurate and useful. I suppose it may be too trivial for knife makers, but not for consumers. David R. Ingham (talk) 02:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The list appears a useful summary although it might be better classified as part of a series of "alloys good for this type of application" articles. I'd be a little uncomfortable if it could be demonstrated that Wp was being subverted to be a resource for "survivalists" etc., but at the same time feel it's wrong to delete information if accurate. MarkMLl (talk) 11:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Technology, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:42, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the topic is important, though I agree that sourcing could be a lot better. There are TV shows on this topic, so I am sure there will be paper or glowing screen references available too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:40, 30 January 2024 (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.