Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Defective interfering particle


 * 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The result was   withdrawn (nominator removed AfD template from article after agreeing here to a merge with no dissenting opinions). —David Eppstein (talk) 23:07, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Defective interfering particle

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article is quite poorly written, badly referenced and I don't think entirely accurate. I propose it instead redirects to the Defective Interfering RNA article, which covers the points in better detail and is essentially the same thing, although could itself do with some expanding. Having just covered this as part of my degree, this current page appears to serve little purpose when compared to the better written Defective Interfering RNA one. More generally, I think the concept needs to be re-written to include the idea of DI-DNAs - which also exist - not just DI-RNAs. rhodesj971 (talk) 11:10, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Looks like a merge case. Question for Would the current title be a reasonable one for an expanded article covering both RNA and DNA? The result would be to a) merge the superior content currently in Defective Interfering RNA into this article and redirect its title here, b) edit the resulting article with new information about DNA examples, and c) create a new redirect from Defective interfering DNA to this article. Opabinia regalis (talk) 04:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh apologies, I didn't consider that this is more of a merge topic - bit new to this. Yes, I think that's a good idea. An article titled Defective interfering particle encompassing both RNA and DNA aspects, with redirects from both, would be a good. I'll try and do that and close this up when I have? Many thanks rhodesj971 (talk) 13:18, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem; merging is a possible outcome for a deletion discussion too. Your plan sounds good. Feel free to ping me if you need help with any of the closing or merging templates. (Since there's so much material being merged in, I suggest using copied or similar on Talk:Defective Interfering RNA to make sure attribution is clear.) Opabinia regalis (talk) 22:56, 1 May 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.