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 redirect to
Research#Research ethics. Even though the subject has potential, there was a consensus that its current incarnation is not suitable for an article in the mainspace.
SpinningSpark or any other user may expand the redirect once more suitable content has been written.
Modussiccandi (
talk)
09:38, 4 April 2022 (UTC)reply
PepperBeast, for the page to be superfluous, it needs to be superfluous to something else. Your suggested redirect to
Morality is ridiculous – that page does not use the word science even a single time.
SpinningSpark18:59, 18 March 2022 (UTC)reply
I don't want you to think I'm against writing about this area, but if what you want to do is write a different article with a different title, you should probably do that.
PepperBeast(talk)20:17, 18 March 2022 (UTC)reply
I don't want to write a different article, I want to improve this one. In any case, I am for keeping the page regardless of whether or not it is worked on immediately.
SpinningSpark20:43, 18 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Research ethics. On the one hand, I think there is potential for a broad-concept article at this title, incorporating
research ethics,
ethics of technology,
nuclear ethics, etc. On the other hand, I'm not a fan of keeping useless articles around on the off-chance that someone will improve them someday. If this is made into a redirect, SpinningSpark or anyone else can easily recreate it with different content if they feel so inclined. (As a side-note, though, I think the article SpinningSpark wants to write is
science of morality, which already exists.)
Dan from A.P. (
talk)
15:55, 19 March 2022 (UTC)reply
No, it isn't. That is what the sources I provided are about, but that was just by way of demonstrating the notability of one aspect of the broad concept. On another aspect there is
The Morality of Weapons Research. Everybody seems to need to tell me what I want to write about. I'm the one who knows what I want to write about.
SpinningSpark19:36, 19 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete As per NOM, this is just a list of wikilinks. To be an article this would have to have content about the topic, and it has none.
Lamona (
talk)
16:55, 20 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete this list of wikilinks. SpinningSpark can write a draft article and then we can decide whether that can be moved to this title. --
Bduke (
talk)
23:16, 20 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete for now. Though the article has great potential, it should probably be returned to draftspace until it can meet the GNG> Spinningspark, I respect your work and ambitions, but this is not yet ready for the mainspace.
Toadspike (
talk)
03:50, 27 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete or draftify: I don't disagree that this topic is notable. However, while article content does not decrease notability (as stated above), being a new creation does not protect an article from being nominated for deletion. (
WP:NEWARTICLE) If this is going to be worked on, it should be done in the draft or user space.
Bsoyka (
talk)
04:55, 27 March 2022 (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.
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 redirect to
Research#Research ethics. Even though the subject has potential, there was a consensus that its current incarnation is not suitable for an article in the mainspace.
SpinningSpark or any other user may expand the redirect once more suitable content has been written.
Modussiccandi (
talk)
09:38, 4 April 2022 (UTC)reply
PepperBeast, for the page to be superfluous, it needs to be superfluous to something else. Your suggested redirect to
Morality is ridiculous – that page does not use the word science even a single time.
SpinningSpark18:59, 18 March 2022 (UTC)reply
I don't want you to think I'm against writing about this area, but if what you want to do is write a different article with a different title, you should probably do that.
PepperBeast(talk)20:17, 18 March 2022 (UTC)reply
I don't want to write a different article, I want to improve this one. In any case, I am for keeping the page regardless of whether or not it is worked on immediately.
SpinningSpark20:43, 18 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Research ethics. On the one hand, I think there is potential for a broad-concept article at this title, incorporating
research ethics,
ethics of technology,
nuclear ethics, etc. On the other hand, I'm not a fan of keeping useless articles around on the off-chance that someone will improve them someday. If this is made into a redirect, SpinningSpark or anyone else can easily recreate it with different content if they feel so inclined. (As a side-note, though, I think the article SpinningSpark wants to write is
science of morality, which already exists.)
Dan from A.P. (
talk)
15:55, 19 March 2022 (UTC)reply
No, it isn't. That is what the sources I provided are about, but that was just by way of demonstrating the notability of one aspect of the broad concept. On another aspect there is
The Morality of Weapons Research. Everybody seems to need to tell me what I want to write about. I'm the one who knows what I want to write about.
SpinningSpark19:36, 19 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete As per NOM, this is just a list of wikilinks. To be an article this would have to have content about the topic, and it has none.
Lamona (
talk)
16:55, 20 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete this list of wikilinks. SpinningSpark can write a draft article and then we can decide whether that can be moved to this title. --
Bduke (
talk)
23:16, 20 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete for now. Though the article has great potential, it should probably be returned to draftspace until it can meet the GNG> Spinningspark, I respect your work and ambitions, but this is not yet ready for the mainspace.
Toadspike (
talk)
03:50, 27 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete or draftify: I don't disagree that this topic is notable. However, while article content does not decrease notability (as stated above), being a new creation does not protect an article from being nominated for deletion. (
WP:NEWARTICLE) If this is going to be worked on, it should be done in the draft or user space.
Bsoyka (
talk)
04:55, 27 March 2022 (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.