Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bombarding


 * 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   redirect to Bombardment. v/r - TP 23:40, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Bombarding

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This 1-sentence article appears to be a dictionary definition, solely, and as such not appropriate for a wp article. Epeefleche (talk) 03:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Bombardment, which is more likely to be what people looking up this term are searching for. If the content that appears on this page now is worthy of coverage in Wikipedia, it should be moved to a different title (probably using a qualifier in parentheses), but I have no opinion about whether this content is worthy of coverage. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 00:33, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete and redirect. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 21:35, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Bombardment, per Sandstien's changes. Well done! Keep. The Neon sign article has a substantial section on the topic, and a quick Google search appears to reveal a variety of sources that could be used to improve the article. (If the section from Neon sign had any citations, I would simply move some of the content; but it looks like a bit more work will be necessary to do it right.) Also, for those considering redirect, please note that the Bombardment article has nothing whatsoever to do with the concept currently covered at Bombarding. Renaming the page in question to something like Bombarding (neon lighting) might be a better approach. -Pete (talk) 19:35, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Aren't you really suggesting that it be deleted and redirect to Neon sign, and that the material here be brought there, and that material expanded over time?--Epeefleche (talk) 20:18, 21 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - this one word can be used in a variety of contexts adn is unsuitable as an article title by itself; there's no content not already explained in tne Neon sign article, and it needs the context of taht article to make any sense. An absurd choice for an article topic. --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:10, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Bombardment, which now has a hatnote to the newly created Bombardment (disambiguation), where the neon sign meaning is mentioned. Doubtful that this detail of a technical process is substantial enough for a spinoff article.  Sandstein   20:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * (small procedural note) If/when this stub is changed to a redirect, I'd suggest changing the link to it in Mercury (element) to a section link in the Neon sign article. Leaving it for now though, as the existence of this article is still under discussion. -Pete (talk) 18:34, 23 June 2011 (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.