Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lasri condensation


 * 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:01, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Lasri condensation

 * – ( View AfD View log )

User: Michael D. Turnbull PRODded as "Article is merely a special case of the standard way to make pyrazole — see that article's first reaction diagram" and with a pointer to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry. But it had already been the PROD/dePROD process a few years ago, so here we are at AFD. DMacks (talk) 18:14, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. DMacks (talk) 18:14, 13 October 2020 (UTC)


 * If it makes sense to have the high-resolution mechanism diagram at Pyrazole, then that might be added there. But in any case this article should be deleted because there seems to be no indication that this is actually an in-use name for this process, apart from the man himself claiming so. We don't want redirects for promotional neologisms. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 18:53, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Pyrazole, appropriate subsection — Ad Meliora Talk∕Contribs 19:02, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete without redirect Changing my vote per the comments from Hbf878 and DMacks, and subsequent research. — Ad Meliora Talk∕Contribs 12:00, 15 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment: User:Ad Meliora seems to have zero record of contributing to chemistry topics in Wikipedia.--Smokefoot (talk) 22:33, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete without redirect as the term Lasri condensation is not established outside Wikipedia, see also Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemistry. Embed reaction scheme into Pyrazole. --Hbf878 (talk) 22:01, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete without redirect as a baseless neologism. No secondary sources seem to use this term, but only Lasri and their affiliates. No secondary sources seem to demonstrate that this is a distinct and notable topic at all (few citations for the lead ref). Instead, others have noted that this is (at best) a slight variant of a well-established other topic. So it could be a nice additional or different example in that article's scope. This !vote is wearing my chemistry-editor's hat; nom was purely administrative. DMacks (talk) 22:23, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:OR and WP:TOOSOON. Bearian (talk) 15:46, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Chemical Abstracts has no entry for Lasri condensation. The article lacks secondary references and even the primary ones are weak. The article is not written well and the artwork is primitive. There is just not much quality or notability here.--Smokefoot (talk) 22:30, 18 October 2020 (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.