Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flying glass


 * 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. after improvements to the article. ansh 666 20:46, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Flying glass

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Iazyges  Consermonor   Opus meum  19:53, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:23, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:23, 18 September 2017 (UTC)


 * But the article isn't about the phrase, it's about the physical phenomenon as a hazard. – Uanfala 11:25, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. – Uanfala 11:26, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * The article begins "Flying glass is an expression commonly used to mean..." I'd say the Afd nomination applies. Delete. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:13, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTDIC, which is implicit in the deletion rationale, has to do with articles' subjects, and not with the particular way their first sentences happen to have been worded. – Uanfala 20:12, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeed but I just don't see anything more than that, at in this time. I'd be willing to revisit my !vote if someone can develop a bona fide encyclopedia article on the subject of flying glass, which I rather doubt. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:40, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: I can't say notability is impossible, but this article does not show it.--Milowent • hasspoken  19:43, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It is notable to anyone who has been seriously injured by flying glass, and to the attending ambulance and medical staff. The article needs to be expanded to describe the injuries that it causes. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:59, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. Plausible search term, more than a WP:DICDEF, could do with some more bluelinks. Narky Blert (talk) 23:09, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:17, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Right up there with sharp stick, blunt object, too hot coffee and the million and one other routine dangers. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:48, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, there are Puncture wounds, Blunt traumas/Blunt instruments and Scalding. – Uanfala 23:13, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Fwiw, there's some relevant content at Blast injury but the two topics don't meaningfully overlap. – Uanfala 23:14, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep With a simple WP:BEFORE style search I was able to quickly find and add three significant book references to the article. This is an important consideration building and vehicle design, in risk assessment, and in forensic investigations. With multiple RS added and more remaining to be used from the literature, this topic passes notability per WP:GNG. --Mark viking (talk) 23:41, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep as expanded. The case is obvious now, unless someone comes up with a meaningful merge proposal, but I can't see a suitable target. – Uanfala 07:55, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep now that it has been expanded. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 15:58, 28 September 2017 (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.