Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Basic research


 * 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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:37, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Basic research

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )


 * Delete Seems like an essay. Doc Quintana (talk) 14:39, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep The article (like its counterpart Applied research) is a stub with plenty of potential for development as a decent article. The fact that it reads like an essay may be a reason for tagging it for cleanup, but isn't a good reason for deleting it. Jimmy Pitt   talk  17:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If you can clean it up to make it sound less like an essay, i'm happy to remove the nom. I wasn't aware that it was a specific term, Applied research seems to be, but i'm not an expert on the subject being discussed here. Doc Quintana (talk) 19:28, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Per our deletion process, you ought to familiarise yourself with a topic by searching for sources before nominating it for deletion. By taking this simple precaution, you will be spared the embarrassment of being buried in snow, as in this case.  Colonel Warden (talk) 19:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Alpha Quadrant    talk    19:35, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Blue skies research which is "sometimes used interchangeably with the term basic research." BSR while still short is considerable more developed.--Salix (talk): 21:50, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Question can anyone tell me the difference between basic research and Blue skies research? If so then keep is a viable option, otherwise merge of the two still seems to be the best option. I'm not too bothered about which way round, but we don't need two articles on the same topic.--Salix (talk): 20:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Answer Basic research, is research to find out why something is, happens &c, usually with a defined end point. BSR is the same except that it has no defined end point.
 * Basic research is about fundamentals - establishing the groundwork, the elementary facts and the theories which explain them. Blue sky research is more about applications at the cutting edge - a space elevator; quantum computing; genetic engineering &c.  There is an expected result from the latter but, because of its pioneering nature, some surprises may be expected. Colonel Warden (talk) 21:14, 26 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Basic research is the start of exploration in any form of research and if found to be useful is often the starting point for applied research (as the name implies, applied research is the research of application of outcomes of basic research). I do not agree with the redirect because it should be the other way around, blue skies research could be an example of basic research. Nowadays funding for basic research (especially when the end point does not seem to have impact value) is often hard to get, so funding for blue skies research will become increasingly harder. Unfortunately it is also increasingly difficult to estimate where basic research might lead, but one thing is absolutely clear, without basic research there would be no Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JHvW (talk • contribs)
 * Keep click the Google news link at the top of the AFD. I see results like that in it.  It is clearly a notable subject, and thus deserving of a Wikipedia article.  AFD is not cleanup.  If you have a problem with an article, fix it or discuss it on the talk page.  Don't just send it straight to AFD.   D r e a m Focus  01:02, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Basic research is a major concept in science. The term is used to distinguish between fundamental science and applied science. This terms belong in an encyclopedia, not just a dictionary. Could this article be merged with other similar articles? Probably. Should it be deleted. No. Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 01:12, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems like a stub. Colonel Warden (talk) 07:22, 24 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - Article is a stub. It just needs to be fixed. -- Alpha Quadrant   talk    22:20, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have added a reference from Nature. Axl  ¤  [Talk]  10:11, 29 September 2010 (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.