Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biological small-angle scattering


 * 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The result was Keep (nomination withdrawn). (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000(talk) 00:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Biological small-angle scattering

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:PROMOTION: This article is biased beyond repair, promoting almost exclusively scientific work and software by one group. After removing this highly special material, nothing remains that isn't covered by the articles small-angle scattering and small-angle X-ray scattering. -- Nsda (talk) 15:51, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Until today, Small-Angle X-ray Scattering was a redirect not to Small-Angle X-ray Scattering but to Biological small-angle scattering - looks to me like another indication that the Biological small-angle scattering article is a flagrant self-promotion activity. Other redirects should also be checked. -- Nsda (talk) 20:37, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

This article has useful information that is not present on the other pages. Protein SAXS theory and data analysis is not a large field, so it should not be surprising that the cited work is only from a few groups. This does not automatically mean that the content is biased. Unless those criticizing it can point to factually incorrect material, it should be retained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.34.128.250 (talk) 00:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I second the above comment, this article indeed contains a large amount of information not present on other SAXS-related pages. As the above comment correctly states, the biological (protein) SAXS field is quite small and relatively new, and as a result there are only a very small number of software packages available for SAXS data processing and in particular, model building. Furthermore, the software referenced in Biological small-angle scattering is the de facto standard in the scientific community. I would estimate that at least 90% of SAXS protein models published in the last 10 years were constructed using this software. This fact is unavoidable, and thus frequent references to this software are not an indication of bias. As a final point, I would add that the other pages do not adequately address the process of constructing protein models from SAXS data, and thus Biological small-angle scattering is a valuable reference that should not be removed. -- p212121 (talk) 02:36, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I am not convinced, but as I have no hope to win this debate, I withdraw my deletion request. -- Nsda (talk) 00:13, 29 February 2012 (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.