Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Science

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Science. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Science|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Science. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Science/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Science

Poona College

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

Lacks SIGCOV sources and does not meet WP:NSCHOOL Filmssssssssssss (talk) 14:16, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, India, and Maharashtra. Shellwood (talk) 14:27, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails in GNG as well as WP:NSCHOOL due to the lack of SIGCOV in RS. Although there are lots of sources available, they are either local news mentions or WP:ROUTINE coverage about college events. BhikhariInformer (talk) 16:02, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Islam, and Science. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:21, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG / WP:NSCHOOL.4meter4 (talk) 20:39, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nigerian Academy of Science Media Awards

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

Not independently notable, suggest redirect to Nigerian Academy of Science 🄻 🄰 16:06, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Awards, Organizations, and Nigeria. 🄻 🄰 16:06, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 18:54, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

5th Nigerian Academy of Science Media Awards

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

Lone article about a single instance of the Nigerian Academy of Science Media Awards which I have also nominated for redirect to Nigerian Academy of Science. Suggest the same here. 🄻 🄰 16:07, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Science, and Nigeria. 🄻 🄰 16:07, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Awards-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:09, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 18:55, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nikwax Analogy

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

Article fails WP:N. Attempts to WP:BEFORE failed to find anything not primary or promotional. Another one in Category:Technical fabrics netstars22 (talk) 18:07, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Science. netstars22 (talk) 18:07, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Smartwrap

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

Page fails WP:N - unable to ID sources that aren't primary or non-promotional in nature. Propose to delete or WP:ATD-R to KieranTimberlake (firm in question behind the product). Netstars22 (talk) 15:41, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, and Science. Netstars22 (talk) 15:41, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to KieranTimberlake per nom; all potential sources are promotional. enbi [they/them] • [talk] 16:57, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to KieranTimberlake. Product doesn't have notability on its own. Schnookums123 (talk) 19:01, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

C change

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

Fails to meet WP:N - all references are either marketing material from the manufacturer or quote the marketing material - seems to match a pattern of non-notable articles in Category:Technical fabrics. Netstars22 (talk) 06:02, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Science. Netstars22 (talk) 06:02, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
delete fails GNG. - Walter Ego 09:47, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete marketing or advertising material for this fabric or whatever as a piece of WP:PROMO. Delete it. Iljhgtn (they/them · talk) 00:10, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Iroise National Nature Reserve

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

This article has a good bit of misinformation (for one, reading the French article, it seems the reserve only actually covers the Molène archipelago, and not Ushant or Sein) and strange writing, and the text it was based off of seems to no longer be accessible. I think this article ought to exist, but in it's current state it's doing more harm than good, and it just needs some more time in the oven; if it ever does come back, a full rewrite would be in order, and in that case I think a straight translation of the French article would be just fine. Hugo P. Behrmann (☎) 00:58, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Geography. Hugo P. Behrmann (☎) 00:58, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment, France, and Islands. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:30, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the nature reserve is protected on a national level by the government, and even if the article can't be translated fully at the moment, I think there are few reliable sources in english available to help fix some of the issues (I can try to do this). EM (talk) 02:40, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: the topic is acknowledged as notable by the nominator, who states that “I think this article ought to exist but in its current state it’s doing more harm than good”. The issues described relate to article quality and are matters for improvement per WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM and WP:ATD. This is not a deletion issue. HerBauhaus · talk 07:04, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: per WP:NEXIST, there is reliable sourcing on the topic, including coverage by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) ([1]), the Marine Biodiversity Observation Network ([2]), and peer-reviewed research ([3]). HerBauhaus · talk 10:23, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep An additional study that was conducted in the reserve. Kelob2678 (talk) 11:13, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Okay that’s my bad y’all. I’ll see about just wiping this current article and porting over content from the French version instead of actually taking it offline lol. Hugo P. Behrmann (☎) 14:08, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: All good. There are some solid English language sources on the reserve (IUCN, biodiversity networks etc.). Once the AfD is closed, I'd be happy to jump in and help rewrite or expand the article based on available sourcing. HerBauhaus · talk 14:34, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY and above. Iljhgtn (they/them · talk) 15:00, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Looks like there are two translations for the name. It appears the ICUN uses the term "Iroise Marine Nature Park," which is a more direct translation of Parc naturel marin d’Iroise. This book on sea birds uses the "National Nature Reserve" phrasing. SenshiSun (talk) 00:26, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that was kinda throwing me off with the article's inline French translation being different than the name of the French article. I'll look a little more into this too. Hugo P. Behrmann (☎) 05:05, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The different English naming mentioned above is best resolved using WP:COMMONNAME after the AfD has closed. Where more than one English name exists, the usual approach is to title the article using the most common name in reliable sources and note alternatives in the lead. This is standard cleanup. HerBauhaus · talk 08:48, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford Science Studies

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

WP:BEFORE done, and it would appear to me that is a run of the mill student coaching business. Given the article was created 2 Feb 2026 and mostly relies citations from 2009 and 2010, it would appear that its WP:TOOSOON is too late a number of years ago. The phasing "OXSS is widely considered in the UK as a key authority on revision, with national coverage in newspapers, offering revision advice and guidance" looks to me hella hinkey Wikipedia:AISIGNS. That said, it would appear that this article fails any number of tests for notability, including but not limited to WP:GNG, WP:NHSCHOOL and WP:CORPDEPTH. As always, please do prove me wrong about this. Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 10:39, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The entry includes, in equal measures, references to older news articles (2009 and 2010) and recent news articles (2022, and two from 2025) to demonstrate that it is not a ' is a run of the mill student coaching business'. SchoolViewer (talk) 11:16, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Education, Science, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:00, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep With the rise of child safeguarding concerns, specifically with revision and tutoring operations, it is important to demonstrate where there are notable, reputable organisations, who have been in operation for significant periods of time at reputable venues and with third party news and media referrals. The article includes news, media, links to other approved Wikipedia sources and external, third party references. SchoolViewer (talk) 11:07, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
^ ^ This editor is the creator of the article. RipplingRiver (talk) 22:21, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Blatant promotional COI article, scarcely even cited, written by an SPA. It also bothers me that it's called "Oxford" when there is no real or proven connection to Oxford University. RipplingRiver (talk) 22:29, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The subjective response, above, does not differentiate the place of "Oxford" from the University located in Oxford. Oxford is clearly a city and separate from the University of Oxford. While RipplingRiver declares they are 'bothered', there is clearly no attempt in the article to demonstrate a connection to the university. SchoolViewer (talk) 09:14, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
You only get to say "keep" once. Saying it again doesn't make your case stronger. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 03:22, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete promotional trash that misrepresents passing mentions as praise and displays, as the nominator says, hella hinkey Wikipedia:AISIGNS. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 03:22, 5 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Global Academy of Forensic and Investigative Medicine and Science

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

Page seems to be written by a LLM. All sources are directly tied to the subject and a Google search yields no independent sources that could establish notability.

The related International Journal of Medical Justice suffers from similar problems and has been PRODed. Laura240406 (talk) 20:18, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Science, Medicine, and India. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:37, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Casey Luskin

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

Scientist and attorney who advocates for intelligent design. He fails NPROF with very low citations, so only WP:GNG is relevant. The page itself contains nothing that I see as WP:SIGCOV. Doing a WP:BEFORE he has some books, but I do not see major, independent reviews. Possibly redirect to Discovery Institute as WP:ATD. Taking this to AfD may open a can of worms, but.... Ldm1954 (talk) 21:16, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Philosophy, Law, Religion, and United States of America. Ldm1954 (talk) 21:16, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and South Africa. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:21, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:50, 31 January 2026 (UTC).[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:08, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Much as I'd like to see this entry deleted, I think it should keep, because whether real scientists like it or not Casey Luskin is very well known and often referred to in creationist sources. He is heavily promoted by the Discovery Institute. Athel cb (talk) 09:16, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. For WP:FRINGE workers we need mainstream coverage of their views to satisfy WP:NPOV. Here, we have only a couple of blog rebuttals of some of his work, insufficiently reliable to support notability. My searches in the academic literature found only fringe journals and brief namedrops in mainstream journals, not enough for WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:45, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for lack of trustworthy sources. We need mainstream coverage, as noted above, not promotion from within the creationist circuit. Stepwise Continuous Dysfunction (talk) 04:18, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep. He is pretty influential in creationist circles. Talented-Intellectual-69 (talk) 09:47, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Three out of five citations are by the subject, not about him. Two citations are blogs. That is not enough for a BLP, for which the burden is on the creator/ proponents. Ping me if you find and add at least three better sources. Bearian (talk) 00:30, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

AlphaEase FC

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

Article about an image analysis software product, tagged for notability since June. Looks very doubtful to me so bringing here for consensus. Mccapra (talk) 19:22, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Medicine, Computing, and Software. Mccapra (talk) 19:22, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NPROD. There are over 2000 results for "AlphaEase FC" on Google Scholar, but all of them seem to be trivial mentions of the form "We used this software for analysis". This also reads like an AI-generated article that should be deleted per WP:NEWLLM. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 07:35, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

NIST University

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

Heavy reliance on primary sources; does not have sufficient reputable secondary sourcing to establish WP:NOTABILITY. Brief search for additional sources is similarly sparse, with most results relating to other institutions by similar names. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 14:16, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 14:16, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, India, and Odisha. Shellwood (talk) 14:17, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Management, Science, Engineering, and Technology. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:27, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Zetex (fabric)

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

Appears to be another spam article in Category:Technical fabrics. BEFORE check got nothing, not much in the article in terms of sources. FantasticWikiUser (talk) 17:06, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

delete fails GNG - Walter Ego 17:14, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Science, and Chemistry. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:58, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: Some coverage found [4], [5]. First source in the article sounds ok, but it was penned by the inventor, so not independent. Oaktree b (talk) 19:00, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:39, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pathatrix

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

I have tried to find resources in the past but the only thing I have found was the manual on how to use this device. The "further reading" citations were added on and I believe they mention the device in passing as it's become common with detecting outbreaks. A possible ATD is redirecting to Thermo Fisher Scientific. – The Grid (talk) 15:35, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science, Biology, and Chemistry. – The Grid (talk) 15:35, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect: the article relies solely on a manufacturer user guide which is a primary, promotional source and does not meet WP:RS. The listed academic papers merely mention Pathatrix as a laboratory tool and do not provide significant independent coverage of the subject. The article reads as promotional content (WP:PROMO). As an WP:ATD, redirecting to Thermo Fisher Scientific would be a reasonable option. HerBauhaus · talk 08:06, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, PhantomSteve/talk¦contribs\ 18:08, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I cannot tell if this technology is still in use or whether it led to anything else because sources are lacking. I can say that countless single technological advancements leave media records like this one, then disappear with no media trace. The d:Wikidata:WikiCite project is an appropriate place to data model such concepts and connect them to the research literature, but there is not a reason for any human to read this article when the technology connects to nothing else and there is no story. If this technology made a difference, then either someone is using it but has not talked about it for 20 years, or it evolved into some other named process and did not get credit for doing so, or it contributing to the amorphous advance of science in society. Whatever happened, we have no sources, and there is no Wikipedia notability here. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:39, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Rover Ruckus

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

Non-notable youth robotics competition. Almost all citations are directly from the rulebooks or promotional material from the FIRST organization, failing WP:PRIMARY. I suggest redirecting to FIRST Tech Challenge#Competition themes as an ATD. MidnightMayhem (talk) 08:45, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:22, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Michigan, and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:53, 17 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 09:12, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - one of dozens of similar robotics competitions. Redirect is an acceptable second option. Bearian (talk) 17:17, 27 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fade258 (talk) 12:53, 30 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Science Proposed deletions

Flow arrangement (via WP:PROD on 17 January 2025)
Reiner Kümmel (via WP:PROD on 16 January 2025)
Measure (physics) (via WP:PROD on 7 December 2024)
Evolution equations in high-energy particle physics (via WP:PROD on 4 December 2024)

Science Miscellany for deletion

Science Redirects for discussion

Deletion Review