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. Rlendog ( talk) 14:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Impact of humidity on particulate matter measurement

Impact of humidity on particulate matter measurement (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unencyclopaedic essay. Also, there are citations, but no actual references. Adam9007 ( talk) 23:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:05, 11 May 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete. Close to a speedy G1. This reads like a low-quality machine translation of a copyvio, but I can't find the original. Regardless, it is totally unencyclopedic (I assume the word the nominator meant). — David Eppstein ( talk) 07:00, 11 May 2015 (UTC) reply
  • Lol, yes I did mean unencyclopaedic. Don't know how I missed that! Adam9007 ( talk) 15:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC) reply
• Delete as essentially original research. Bearian ( talk) 19:38, 15 May 2015 (UTC) reply

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.