Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Accretion theory

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 of the debate was redirect; if there's disagreement in the future, feel free to reverse the redirect. Johnleemk | Talk 15:57, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Accretion_theory

My understanding is the theory is called the "nebular theory" or the "solar nebula theory" and is already covered on the article solar nebula. This Accretion_theory article is barely a start anyway. It should be deleted, and all references to this article should be directed at the existing solar nebula article. Can some other people with astronomy backgrounds concur? Myrrhlin 04:59, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

• Redirect article to Solar nebula. However I do not know a lot about astronomy, so I'm not very sure --TBC^{??? ??? ???} 05:05, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to either Accretion disc or Solar nebula, as both appear to be relevant.  (aeropagitica)  06:45, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
• I'm borderline on this because the solar nebula article is specific to our solar system. Accretion disc is a part of the Accretion thoery, but I don't think it's the whole story. It's possible that protoplanetary disc may be closer. But "accretion theory" is the valid over-arching name, so I'm favoring keep. — RJH 16:51, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

(I'm new to this process-- I hope it's appropriate for me to respond in this fashion!) Can you give a reference to your statement: 'accretion theory is the valid over-arching name?' My original objection is precisely that that term is -not- the 'valid over-arching name'. Furthermore, the nebular hypothesis and theory referred specifically to our own solar system historically because there was only one solar system known-- that does not mean planetary scientists think it is not applicable to other systems, it simply means they only recently began to test it and think about revising it. an article about the solar nebula theory can't be written with complete generality to other solar systems, because there is no consensus yet in the scientific community how to improve the model. we are still very early into this process! — Myrrhlin 15:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

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.