Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gravity field

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 to gravity - brenneman^(t)(c) 07:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gravity field

This article is superfluous as articles on gravitational field and gravity already exist. MP (talk) 10:32, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

• This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 18:06, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep or Merge with Gravity. Note that Gravitational field is a redirect to Gravity. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-03 19:45Z
• Redirect to Gravity, looks like there's nothing to merge that isn't already there. If the field needs to be spun off into a separate article (which it doesn't at present), it should be titled Gravitational field. —Wahoofive (talk) 03:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to gravity or gravitation (sorry, I meant 'gravitation' and not 'gravitational field'). MP (talk) 08:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to Gravity nothing here deserving a seperate article and a confusing name. --Pfafrich 23:02, 7 January 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.