Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orders of magnitude (mass flow rate)


 * 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.  Sandstein  11:52, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Orders of magnitude (mass flow rate)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

An un-reliably-sourced article that fails WP:LISTN and is comprised of noble-synthesis of data. And, if someone do manage to find such trivial list(s) in high-school/undergrad science text-book (which often have them to provide an indicative idea of the vastness of the real range of a physical quantity), we are not one.We are an encyclopedia. &#x222F; WBG converse 06:23, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Cannot understand what the title of article is signalling, article is just a complied list of various facts, not encyclopedic, feels like something out of buzzfeed. Fails WP:LISTN. ~  Araratic  &#124; talk  08:16, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Doesn't meet WP:LISTN, and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. None of the list entries are described in the references with regard to the term "mass flow rate". —  Newslinger  talk   09:47, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment This article is part of a set – see the following navigational template. It doesn't make sense to consider this in isolation when other members of the set have been extensively discussed and kept previously.  For example, see RfC, AfD.  Also, it doesn't seem fair to be nominating this article for deletion as a reprisal for the creator's !vote at RfA – see WP:HOUND. Andrew D. (talk) 11:05, 16 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:08, 16 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Totally concurring with ,I fail to see what use at all this 'article' can have on Wikipedia. If it is supposed to be humorous like his 'science' antics at RfA, then it has failed miserably - Wikipedia is not a joke site. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:06, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge to Mass flow rate under an examples section. — Eli355 ( talk  •  contribs ) 17:08, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete as trivia. I don't see the point of merging; this information wouldn't add anything useful to Mass flow rate.  00:41, 24 October 2018 (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.