Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gya


 * 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. Any discussion to merge can happen on the talk page. v/r - TP 00:28, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Gya

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I can find nothing to confirm that this expression is verifiably used somewhere. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:14, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 13:38, 5 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. The term is used in several geological books: see e.g. . -- 202.124.72.211 (talk) 14:35, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge into Year, as it doesn't seem to pass WP:GNG. Unless there are sources actually discussing this term instead of merely using it I fail to see where this topic has significant coverage by third party sources. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 14:58, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge as per Toshio, with just a brief mention of it as an alternate spelling for the measure.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:20, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge and merge Mya (unit) as well. Both are simply definitions and have no potential to grow into a proper articles. Tya already links there. Yoenit (talk) 15:17, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Tya is not a good comparison, as timescales of trillions of years have little realistic application (the universe only being a few billion years old), whereas Gya, on the other hand, is widely and commonly used because it has common application in multiple branches of science (geology, paleontology, earth science, astronomy). —Lowellian (reply) 19:15, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * According to the redirect target Tya is thousand years ago, not tera years ago. Yoenit (talk) 23:09, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Gya is widely used in geology, paleontology, earth science, and astronomy; see   . We should no more delete/merge this than we should delete/merge other commonly used units like the gigabyte, which is separate from megabyte. —Lowellian (reply) 19:15, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep – The term is verifiably used in many areas. The links above this comment performed by Lowellian disqualifies the rationale for deletion as stated by the nominator Toshio Yamaguchi not finding anything confirming the terms being verifiably used somewhere. Northamerica1000 (talk) 03:36, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - I performed another search and found mentions of this term in several works:     . The problem with all the sources presented here are in my opinion that they are either not reliable or those which are (I found one article in a peer reviewed journal: ) only simply use the term. Wikipedia is not a dictionary however, so unless someone can bring up sources which discuss the concept behind Gya I still think this article should be merged. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 08:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge into Year. Stuartyeates (talk) 08:12, 8 September 2011 (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.