Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben-Jacob's bacteria


 * 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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 18:17, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Ben-Jacob's bacteria

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This term appears to be used in almost no sources, suggesting the topic doesn't meet WP:GNG. Appears to largely be promotion of the Ben-Jacobs lab. Useful info in this article on P. dendritiformis and P. vortex is already also at those articles. Term is only currently used in WP mirrors and in a smithsonian mag article (which is using the phrase as a regular possessive phrase, not as a term for these two species). Not used in any papers, suggesting if the term was ever used, it didn't catch on. Ajpolino (talk) 04:12, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ajpolino (talk) 04:13, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Ajpolino (talk) 04:13, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The strains and their behaviour are clearly notable, but as such they have perfectly fine articles at Paenibacillus dendritiformis and Paenibacillus vortex, and these and Eshel Ben-Jacob are well connected in text and links. I don't see any need for merging to the latter, as has been suggested. This is not a bad article but it is simply surplus to requirements. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:54, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak delete I was expecting to recommend retention when I started reading this one, but I fear this is a WP:Neologism, as there's nothing on Google, GBooks or Google scholar to suggest anything other than an informal grouping of two bacterium taxa. No application of the phrase "Ben-Jacob's bacteria" in search results, suggesting this is not a term in actual use, just a use of the possessive. I was concerned this article's title was the only way in to finding Eshel Ben-Jacob, so I've now created Ben-Jacob as a redirect. I agree with that this seems a reasonable article, but just doesn't serve a purpose as the topic is covered in both bacterium articles. I've considered a redirect, but that would suggest the term is in genuine use. I'm  slightly concerned that there has been a merge suggested by  since February to the eponymous biologist, to which noone has responded, yet now we are at a deletion discussion, though I can't see what content would be merged there. And the other bacterium articles are well referenced, but some merging of minor content or sources might be appropriate to each. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:07, 17 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. unnecessary duplication, as explained above.  DGG ( talk ) 15:32, 21 April 2018 (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.