Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biotech industry in Boston

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. There's concern about this being poorly named, but there's clear consensus to keep it. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:25, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Biotech industry in Boston

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

The article is a collection of internal links. WP:NOTLINK Jamez42 (talk) 19:34, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. First, if an article subject has potential to include more information, it doesn't need to be deleted. It can be improved. That's why we don't delete every stub article. Second, WP:PURPLIST, says "Lists which contain internally linked terms (i.e., wikilinks) serve, in aggregate, as natural tables of contents and indexes of Wikipedia." Natureium (talk) 21:10, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As above, would appear to have the potential to be a good article. Deathlibrarian (talk) 22:51, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 01:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 01:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 01:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 01:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 01:08, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The article could be renamed as a list if it meets the notability criteria. While the last editions were a significant contribution for the content, per WP:OSE I wish to give Biotechnology industry in China and Biotechnology in India as examples, as they include more comprehensive information regarding the industry as a whole. One of my concerns is also that an article only about Boston is too obscure, so I also encourage simply creating "Biotechnology industry in the United States".--Jamez42 (talk) 16:12, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Important tech topic that meet WP:GNG by decent coverage in reliable sources Business Insider, The Economist. And the article has even more, including sources from Nature which all discuss the topic directly. I agree it needs to be renamed to use formal term " Biotechnology" instead of informal "Biotech" but that's not issue of AfD, it would be done later. –Ammarpad (talk) 07:15, 14 January 2018 (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.