Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bypass duct


 * 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 merge to Turbofan. -- Scott Burley (talk) 02:11, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Bypass duct

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Request deletion or merging to a larger article. No reference listed. Tagged with since December 2009. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 21:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 21:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 21:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 21:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Yes, it needs references - but there are plenty available via a simple Google search. It is in dire need of some TLC, but WP:DINC. Jmertel23 (talk) 21:54, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , I feel the subject can be merged with another article, possibly the turbo fan one? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be opposed to a merge, but it wouldn't be my first choice. Jmertel23 (talk) 12:41, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - Unreferenced article on a subject that can easily be expanded. Spyder212 (talk) 22:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , I think it should be merged since the duct itself won't pass WP:GNG. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 23:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * delete Clearly notable as a topic, but so what? We have no article. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:02, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge into Turbofan. Are we really going to have an article for every component of a turbofan? There's one for combustion chamber, but at least that one applies to internal combustion engines in general. The bypass duct is too specific to warrant a stand-alone article. --Deeday-UK (talk) 11:47, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, we should have an article for every component of a turbofan! It's what we do. For what possible reason wouldn't we? Andy Dingley (talk) 12:08, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Because we are an encyclopedia, not a Haynes manual. How much can you write about turbofan bypass ducts that cannot fit in the Turbofan article? Not much, in my view. --Deeday-UK (talk) 14:13, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. <i style="font-family:'Rock salt','Comic Sans MS'; color: Green;">Tyw7</i> (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 12:02, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Merge and delete. Bypass ducts are just ducts used in a trivially particular way. They appear in many places, with the annular ducts in turbofans being just one example. The parent turbofan article could do with a technical section on the fan and ducting that make it distinct from other jets, so the content here should be merged across. There is no rationale for keeping this as a redirect to anywhere. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 12:02, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep A quick before search shows there's been a lot written about bypass ducts. Most of the results are technical, so difficult for me to source, but I think it clearly passes WP:GNG. I support keeping this, but if not kept, should at least be merged, perhaps to turbofans. SportingFlyer  T · C  23:01, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , well I think it's a part of the turbofan --<i style="font-family:'Rock salt','Comic Sans MS'; color: Green;">Tyw7</i> (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 00:27, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge and delete Its part of something. As to how easy it is to source, then source it, its been how many days not and not one source had been added.Slatersteven (talk) 10:10, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge whatever is useful (seems to be the picture, and a little bit of the text which is un-sourced however) to Bypass ratio, which this article is umm, a POVFORK (or DUCTFORK?) of. The bypass duct is what makes the Bypass ratio. Bypass ratio article already discusses the duct. One could make an article on the "Bypass duct" - however the current article is less developed than its parent article (Turbofan or Bypass ratio) and lacks sources.Icewhiz (talk) 13:42, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge to Turbofan. Obviously the need for any separate treatment has not been pressing enough over the last decade to add even a minimum of sources. As a component of an already heavily covered mechanism, there seems to be no mileage in having a standalone article on this; any material will be more usefully presented in context. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:23, 29 April 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.