Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neutron scanner


 * 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 merge‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Neutron imaging. Daniel (talk) 00:16, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Neutron scanner

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Article has been tagged as unsourced for over a decade - I did a Google search and the subject does not seem to be notable. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:50, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:50, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Industrial_radiography Neutron imaging: or Merge if any of the sources here are worth keeping. Owen&times; &#9742;  14:34, 14 December 2023 (UTC) Changed merge/redir target per comments below. Owen&times;  &#9742;  12:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Cargo scanning is just one use for neutron scanning. I've turned up 6 refs for neutron scanning applications in strain measurement, radioactive waste characterization, archaeology, tank measurements, weld evaluations, nuclear fuel fabrication. There are still more uses out there. For this reason, I recommend against redirecting to a cargo scanning section. As for merging, there's now a lot to merge. -- A. B. (talk • contribs •  global count)  18:54, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3 more applications I've referenced: medical, lunar dust analysis, concrete research. -- A. B. (talk • contribs •  global count)  19:34, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Are any of those sources secondary? I see a lot of academic publications there, which certainly establish verifiability, but without SIGCOV by secondary sources, we don't have the notability we need for a standalone article on the subject. That is why I suggested a merger to a notable topic. For a section there, we don't need independent notability, just verifiability. If Non-intrusive cargo scanning isn't the best target, I'd be happy to consider others. Owen&times;  &#9742;  20:34, 14 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep. As I noted when I removed the PROD tag, numerous Google Scholar results indicate neutron scanners are notable. I recommend checking Google Scholar as a "WP:BEFORE" step before deleting this kind of article - it turns up stuff a normal Google Search does not. Also, I note that the article has refs. I appreciate all the many hours Chidgk1 puts every week into purging unreferenced junk from Wikipedia; this one, however, is a keeper. -- A. B. (talk • contribs •  global count)  17:53, 14 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Withdrawn by nominator Thank you for fixing and referencing the article. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:05, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * you are free to change your mind, and strike out (not delete!) your initial nomination reasoning here. But once any editor has expressed a view other than "Keep" in an AfD, it cannot be circumvented. Please see WP:WITHDRAWN for details. I also restored your AfD notice on the article, as required. Please leave it there until this AfD is properly closed by an uninvolved editor. Thank you. Owen&times; &#9742;  18:28, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah I see I did not know that - makes sense Chidgk1 (talk) 18:34, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * No problem, and no harm done. Owen&times; &#9742;  18:43, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep . Merge to Neutron imaging or Industrial radiography. I understand that neutron scanners are used not only for screening the cargo, but also in applied crystallography, and in general it is a part of neutron imaging. My very best wishes (talk) 16:46, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * So would it make sense to merge this article into Neutron imaging? Chidgk1 (talk) 18:01, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Indeed. I agree. My very best wishes (talk) 01:54, 20 December 2023 (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.