Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glowing pickle


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 06:53, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Glowing pickle

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested PROD. Fails GNG, due to title would probably be OR if not for the two refs. (Title makes it sound like a specific glowing pickle, which it is not.) South Nashua (talk) 17:55, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep and move to Glowing pickle experiment or something similar. This has been covered non-trivially by several RS, including the Washington Post. – Train2104 (t • c) 19:54, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Just to confirm, you want to delete the article here, but recreate it with a more appropriate title? If there is additional RS, I'd be fine with something like Electrical conductivity within pickles or something like that, although a broader scope would probably be more prudent. South Nashua (talk) 02:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment. (article-author here) I had planned to move it to Glowing pickle demonstration (it's usually something you see not that you do yourself, and it's more about the glowing than the simple conductivity), but Glowing pickle experiment is reasonable too. But I did not want to rename it while a discussion about its previous form was happening at WP:Deletion review. DMacks (talk) 03:08, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment I'll move it for you to that first title you recommended, I think we've developed some good discussion here to improve the article and establish notability. The title is confusing, so I think a redirect and move may help resolve the issue in addition to the additional RS. South Nashua (talk) 19:27, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge - Science project would seem to be the logical place, but that article has so many problems I'm not sure it's relevant. This, and other common projects such as a baking soda volcano, have enough coverage to meet GNG, but aren't great topics for stand-alone articles. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 22:19, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep (as creator of its current form). Independently notable demonstration--some popular press, but also used in multiple academic settings and identified as a specifically useful teaching example. There are hidden comments with cites of a standard chemistry textbook discussion of it and a J. Chem. Ed. article discussing the teaching-usefulness of it. To quote that article, "The electric  pickle is a  classic demonstration that has been widely used in both high school and college settings to explain the general principles behind atomic emission. This demonstration  is  particularly  helpful..." DMacks (talk) 03:08, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep This is a demonstration at a science center I have visited, and that it is widely known can be confirmed using Google.  The argument for deletion is incoherent, and there is no evidence that the nominator attempted to resolve his dispute or even clarify his/her viewpoint before involving AfD volunteers.  AfD is for discussion regarding worthless articles that need admin tools.  Unscintillating (talk) 17:03, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment There's no such thing as a worthless article, only an article that doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Every edit has worth to someone. South Nashua (talk) 19:27, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep verifiable and notable science experiment. The present sources in the article shows the experiment stands out of many and no convincing reason for deletion. This is also not WP:OR as the nom thought, as clearly shown by reference used. I also agree with renaming (move) as some people suggested above, although this is not place to discuss such–Ammarpad (talk) 18:04, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Pardon me if I rant a bit here.  AfD's sometimes make me shake my head, usually at the total crap people are arguing to keep.  This one makes me sad, and a little angry, at the idea that we're trying to get rid of an article on an important STEM topic.  I'll admit I had never heard of the glowing pickle experiment until a few days ago, but it didn't take me long to discover that this is a classic electrochemistry demonstration.  What makes it popular is the entertainment value, but it's also a serious scientific demonstration.  It touches on both classical chemistry of salt solutions and electrical conduction, but also on quantum mechanics and atomic orbitals to explain the electroluminescent properties.  If we're not keeping articles like this, what's the point?  Anyway, there's tons of good sources.  Here's some of the best that I found in a few minutes.  Presented more or less in order of value to demonstrate WP:N.
 * New York Times
 * Washington Post
 * Journal of Chemical Education
 * CSI: Crime Scene Investigations
 * MIT TechTV
 * University of Washington Department of Chemistry
 * Chemistry as a Game of Molecular Construction: The Bond-Click Way
 * Addendum: It also saddens me that whoever did the initial stub sorting, tagged this as a Vegetable stub, but not a Science stub (I've since fixed that). -- RoySmith (talk) 01:43, 13 December 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.