Talk:Gas porosity
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Proposed deletion
The article has problem with NPOV, but I disagree with presented reasons for deletion, If this information is a copy of published information, it can't be OR. Also, gas porosity is quite notable thing to have its own article. This article is about gas porosity and not about the Patent 5684299 solely. There fore I remove the deletion tag. Beagel 18:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Nope. A patent has to be OR - by definition it can't be anything else or the patent wouldn't be awarded. Also this IS an article about the patent because it's a copy of the patent. andy 19:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- You can't be serious. Of course it should be original for the patent, but when the patent is published and same information cited (well, copied is more correct in this case) in Wikipedia, it is NOT original research. Please see what WP:OR is. And this article is about gas porosity and NOT about the patent even if the information is copied from the patent description.Beagel 19:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- The only distinction between this and what WP:OR usually applies to is that this wasn't published first on Wikipedia. Functionally, it makes no difference, as the only source is the original, primary source. Someguy1221 21:32, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] Merge proposal
Propose to merge Formation Evaluation Neutron Porosity into this article. Beagel 18:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)