Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Military's using Infared


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 02:15, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Military's using Infared
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No references, not written in an encyclopedic manner, notability is suspect at best. Most material covered in other articles. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 06:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. All of this text was copied (without attribution) from infrared. There's nothing worth keeping of it. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 07:15, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. A check on the author's contributions shows he or she logged in one day, made some changes to the infrared article (which included incorrectly changing the spelling to infared), created a article on Calorific rays (mentioned in the infrared article as another name for infrared), then created the page in question. Reading the calorific rays page, we get a bit more insight into the author. The next day the author created a user page, probably while in school judging by the content, and never contributed again. I'm thinking it's safe to say this article is absolutely worth deleting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JFlav (talk • contribs) 02:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete for the reasons given above. There is nothing in this incorrectly titles cut and paste job of merit. Nuttah68 10:50, 24 October 2007 (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.