Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Science and technology (2nd nomination)

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2015 March 4.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. SNOW.... j⚛e decker ^talk 16:38, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Science and technology

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

WP:DICDEF seems to rely on the existence of the term "science and technology" but doesn't offer anything but the most basic of dictionary definitions. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 19:12, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect - most of the "keep" comments in the 2006 AfD hinged on seeing how the article would develop - it has, in fact, been cut down since then. In the current state, it's still redundant and useless as anything but a WP:DICDEF (and vandalism magnet, for whatever reason). Possible redirect targets include Science, technology and society or History of science and technology. ansh666 20:16, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. There's nothing here but a bare one-sentence definition. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:29, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. st170e^talk 23:00, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Snow Delete (or maybe even speedy delete under WP:A3), there just isn't any actual content here. --Obsidi (talk) 05:18, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The Chinese-conscious me thinks of zh:科技 (a dab), but that term is at least a portmanteau. "Science and technology" in English is just straight up two things. 野狼院ひさし _{Hisashi Yarouin} 05:52, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This might make sense as a portal; certainly not as an article. -- 120.23.166.5 (talk) 11:35, 31 October 2014 (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.