Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cariphalte
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. JForget 00:14, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Cariphalte (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Very short article with unclear notability and without the third party sources. Beagel (talk) 15:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Google books has many non-trivial hits, e.g. Performance and Durability of Bituminous Materials By J. G. Cabrera, J. R. Dixon: "Cariphalte DM has been marketed aggressively since the mid1980's .... Specific benefits ... have been detailed elsewhere, Preston (1991) and Whiteoak (1989) .... " Abby Kelleyite (talk) 21:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep. Not much of an article, but the GB sources should give enough to write something. -- Radagast3 (talk) 09:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:22, 29 August 2010 (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.