Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of microfluidics research groups (3rd nomination)

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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:03, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of microfluidics research groups

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

WP:NOT DIRECTORY. Probably none of these groups is sufficiently notable for a WP article. DGG ( talk ) 04:25, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:52, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 06:52, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as this makes me think of Draft:List of companies in Greater Richmond, Virginia which I also felt is simply unnecessary considering the overall appearance of it. Simply not an acceptable article, SwisterTwister talk 06:53, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above. Xxanthippe (talk) 08:12, 31 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]
Delete Listcruft violating NOTADIRECTORY. Basically just a collection of external links to homepages of non-notable research groups. --Randykitty (talk) 09:07, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unnotable listcruft (no evidence of notability for the set, even though some of the groups might be notable on their own). I could not find any valid keep arguments in the former two discussions. Though they are 4 and 5 years old, for the sake of discussion, I ping Nergaal, Riffic, Avala, Stvfetterly. Per WP:VOTESTACK, also pinging LibStar, ~~BelloWello~~ (indef block), Postdlf though the "delete" side does not seem to be in danger of under-representation. Tigraan (talk) 11:29, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:38, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

see also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of microfluidics related companies If there are more of the sort to be ferreted out I have't found them yet. DGG ( talk ) 02:39, 6 April 2016 (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.