Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CuSil


 * 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. The nominator has subsequently cast a keep !vote thereby de facto withdrawing their nomination and there are no other arguments to delete. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:10, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

CuSil

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG and WP:PRODUCT. No sources are cited and no claim for notability is made.  Blue Rasberry  (talk)  23:23, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:25, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:25, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Weak keep: There are about 200 journal papers mentioning this stuff, I've added some content and it might be ok now. However; If we have a page on one of their alloys then we could end up with pages on all of them, turning us into an advertising space. --Project Osprey (talk) 10:19, 27 January 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:38, 31 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep - Useful encyclopedic information. Sourcing needs to be improved. Carrite (talk) 12:48, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep A source is added and a claim is made. This article can be kept.  Blue Rasberry   (talk)  17:35, 31 January 2015 (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.