Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Introductory Physical Science

Comment: I don't see non-notability listed as a VFD criterion. Ketsuban has spoken. The debate is over. 02:28, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There are quite a few books with this title (or with this phrase as part of the title). This 13-word stub gives no clue as to which book is being discussed, and even if we were to pick one to expand the article around, there's not a whole lot of expansion to be done for a high school science text. Redirect to Physical science. This could probably have been speedied as a short article with little or no context. AиDя01DTALK 03:27, May 24, 2005 (UTC)
Delete: Utterly useless substub that I would speedy delete under criterion #1 + nonsense. The article says that it's a book that's about what it's about. Nothing specific, just a user test of the "I made an article about my textbook" sort. Ridiculous to even debate it. Geogre 03:30, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I would have speedy deleted this as well, there's no content here. -- Cyrius|✎ 04:17, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, could be speedied for lack of context. --TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 05:42, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete. As Wikipedia:Patent nonsense would define it, it's "meaningful after a fashion..." sɪzlæk [ +t, +c ] 09:00, May 24, 2005 (UTC)