Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salt crystals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 redirect to salt. KrakatoaKatie 05:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Salt crystals

Salt crystals (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

There is nothing but an advertisement for lamps. Cisz Helion 02:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

  • For now, Delete as an advertisement. However if someone who knows about these salt crystals can rewrite the article, keep. CattleGirl talk | sign! 03:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep 99% of the article is about a natural formation/element and has encyclopedic value. It is the notes section on GAMMA Salt Cristals, Ltd that should be deleted, as it is clearly an advertisement. The rest of the article may need improvement but should not be deleted. Betnap 03:16, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep Redirect to Sodium chloride#Crystal structure. Someone has removed the spam.--TBCΦtalk? 03:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment As far as I can tell, the claim that "heated salt emits ions" is pseudo-science. As long as there is no reliable source on this claim, there is not even a stub to keep.Cisz Helion 04:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
    • It's completely nonsensical. If you heat salt long enough, is it supposed to release all its chlorine as negative ions and turn into a chunk of sodium? I have no clue where this idea came from, but it has absolutely no basis in fact, and no place in an encyclopedia. Zetawoof(ζ) 23:21, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment This still reads like a hoax or an ad. Negative Ions? Not voting to delete because I think a better article can be written.--68.40.58.255 04:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete due to lack of sources. SmokeyJoe 06:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - not actually about salt crystals, but avbout somne kind of new age lamp. Artw 14:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Redirect as per TBC --DorisH 17:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm with TBC on this one. Let's redirect it over to Sodium chloride#Crystal structure, and make a note in that article that they are occasionally used for lamps - without mentioning anything about "heated negative ions". ♠PMC♠ 19:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Salt (verb) totally redundant. If someone didn't understand my pun, I meant delete. --Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 19:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Move to Salt crystal lamps and rewrite the article there, about Peter Ferreira, his "Institute of Biophysical Research Germany" and how little basis there is in science for his pet theory of salt crystal ionization. People should be able to find information on how wacky and unsupported this idea is before they buy these lamps. I don't read German, but from what I can gather through the translator, this article I found on Google Scholar would seem to be relevant. Redirect the current page to Sodium chloride#Crystal structure. I guess that means delete, after all, doesn't it. Hmmm. Well, I really would like someone to write the article about the bad science. Maybe I'll look into it. Too bad I don't read German . . . but surely someone else has written an exposé in English, right? —Carolfrog 23:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I removed all pseudoscience. Now it's a barebones article about...crystals of salts. The actual things, not some whack lamps. M1ss1ontomars2k4 (T | C | @) 01:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Move some of the material removed by M1ss1ontom to a new article on "salt crystal lamps" which are a legitimate topic (even if the science supporting them isn't). Crypticfirefly 04:08, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I copied a bunch of it to my userspace. I'll work on seeing if I can't write a good article on the lamps or on the supposed properties of the Himalayan crystals, and then I'll move it back into the mainspace at an appropriate article name. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Carolfrog (talk • contribs) 00:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC).
  • Redirect to salt now that the crackpottery is gone and only a dicdef is left. —David Eppstein 19:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Redirect to salt. - grubber 04:28, 15 March 2007 (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.