Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interstitial Suspension


 * 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 delete. Michig (talk) 09:52, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Interstitial Suspension

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:RS and WP:SYN. WCityMike (talk) 02:53, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - no notability PianoDan (talk) 04:47, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * We don't know anything about this, so let's write it up in Wikipedia. is not a correct approach to encyclopaedia writing. There's no verifiable content to put here to replace content that even acknowledges that it comes straight off the top of a Wikipedia editor's head in violation of our no original research policy.  Uncle G (talk) 09:21, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 10:57, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 10:57, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per Uncle G. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 11:06, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as quasi-hoax. Xxanthippe (talk) 11:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC).
 * Comment – This is actually a valid scientific term phrase used in various contexts, but the article is not about it the term, nor is it written in a manner that convey's the scientific context of it the term whatsoever. The article in it's state is about a neologism that hasn't received coverage in reliable sources. Here are some sources that utilize the phrase are about this actual topic , which varies, and is used in the context of water filtration and treatment, bivalves, nematodes, and other animals. Here's some stuff from a GBooks search: , , ,  , , , . Northamerica1000(talk) 12:00, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No, that's not a coherent topic. That's a random admixture of partial phrase matches, including sources that are actually about suspension feeders that occupy the interstitial water  of a sediment. Uncle G (talk) 22:43, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I struck parts of my comment above and !vote below. Northamerica1000(talk) 00:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Even if this is a thing, it's not this thing. Unverifiable original research. Mcewan (talk) 12:04, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - I may someday create an article about the actual term and concepts that are associated with it. This article would require an entire rewrite from scratch, (if it's even actually notable as a concept, rather than just being a phrase *) and fails WP:NEO in it's current form. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:09, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 *  *  An addendum to my !vote. Northamerica1000(talk) 00:55, 16 January 2013 (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.