Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Terminal velocity (derivations)


 * 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. There is nothing in this article now that can be merged back into Terminal_velocity, and the title Terminal_velocity (derivation) is quite useless as redirect. Ruslik (talk) 12:24, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Terminal velocity (derivations)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Content fork of Terminal velocity. The derivation is already included in the TV article. Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 06:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC) 
 * Delete. Unneccesary duplication of information. I don't see anyone hitting this before the main article, and once there they would not need to hit the fork. Arakunem Talk 18:41, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:23, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Please see WP:SUMMARY. This is clearly a sub-article meant to save space. I would advice the editors to move as much derivation information into this article, and leave the main one for the words. Would make everything better for everyone: a non-math inclined reader would get a nice explanation, and math inclined readers can go to the derived (ha-ha!) page. Thanks!--Cerejota (talk) 01:04, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect back. Another derivation in terminal velocity uses show/hide functionality to hide complicated derivations and there's no immediate space issues to counter with a split. - Mgm|(talk) 18:08, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The derivation in the article already covers whatever is contained in this one. It's a content fork, and merging is pointless.Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 00:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect Delete (now that the relevant content has been copied to the main article). Contra Headbomb's comment, the derivation in this article is worth keeping (the derivation in the main article is more general, for arbitary t, consequently much more complicated - this one captures the essential physics of the terminal velocity situation, and doesn't require such a high level of mathematics).  Djr32 (talk) 11:21, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've "merged" the two things (which came down rephrasing stuff), but the redirect is pointless as the only thing linking to this is the Terminal velocity article itself.Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 12:56, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair point about the redirect, I've changed my vote above. (I think the changes you made in the article were more than rephrasing stuff - the main article is much better now than it previously was.)  Djr32 (talk) 15:49, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Well I did other things other than simply rephrasing, but as far as the merge is concered, that's all I did.Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 16:29, 29 December 2008 (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.