Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pesticide research


 * 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   keep. If merger is desired, that can be discussed through the usual methods. The Bushranger One ping only 09:25, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Pesticide research

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The information on this page is duplicated in pesticide and various other pesticide related pages. In addition, it is not clear what the scope of this page should be. DivaNtrainin (talk) 23:43, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Disagree No other article treats this topic in depth or covers all of the material that it does. E.g., the terms (S)-metolachlor, pinoxaden and indonane are not found elsewhere in WP. Also, the applications of techniques used in drug research for agrochemicals is explored. The initial form of the article draws from a reliable secondary source. Finally, the presence of articles such as pharmaceutical research indicates that this way of addressing the topic has been accepted. NB I am the originator of the article. Lfstevens (talk) 00:11, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:27, 9 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment As per WP:Deletion policy, content disputes may be closed by any uninvolved editor.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:19, 10 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - This article is entirely too spooky. It reads to me like part of a primer for some fresh-out-of-college (or maybe self-taught?) chemist about to start a new job with Dow or Monsanto.Paavo273 (talk) 02:27, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 10:27, 15 February 2014 (UTC)




 * Keep, with a distinct merge possibility. Much of the content in this article is not in the Pesticide article, and the topic is notable. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:49, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep can be developed further about overlying pesticide research. - Sidelight 12 Talk 08:17, 16 February 2014 (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.