Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Instrumentation in petrochemical industries

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 keep. czar 19:58, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Instrumentation in petrochemical industries

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Instrumentation in petrochemical industries (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Not a clear article, and unclear how it meets WP:N/ Boleyn (talk) 19:33, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

• Keep It's very clear how it meets WP:N – there are entire books on the topic such as Instrumentation and Controls in the Oil and Petrochemical Industries or Instrumentation in the Chemical and Petroleum Industries. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:30, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

• Keep - I feel like we should just keep copy-pasting "Keep per WP:BEFORE", "Keep per WP:BEFORE", "Keep per WP:BEFORE" over and over again until particular editors finally get the message. St★lwart¹¹¹ 02:52, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
• Keep. If the article is not clear then I suppose it could be tagged suitably but it would be far better to raise the difficulties on the talk page. Please do this. It is certainly not a criterion for deletion. Personally, I think the article's text is adequately clear. I am staggered that anyone might think that notability is not clear since there are multiple in-depth independent reliable sources. Because I find the rationale so weird I am unable to rebut it. Thincat (talk) 08:42, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
• Obvious Keep. The topic is clearly notable: the article is about the complex equipment used to monitor oil and natural gas extraction, storage, transportation and refining processes. There is a bit of a problem with the article as it stands, in that it doesn't provide a clear explanatory framework for the topic, doesn't clearly explain to non-experts why this is a notable subject, and doesn't put the instrumentation requirements in the context of the processes that they monitor. Does Wikipedia have a Wikiproject on Control Engineering? If so, this is clearly an article for them to work on. If not, can we encourage the main engineering Wikiprojects to get a couple of experts to look at this? Anyway, clearly notable and important topic. Needs a lot of work, but should be kept. RomanSpa (talk) 18:35, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
• Keep - The article is a bit odd as far as wiki article goes as it is basically a descriptive list, but sometimes that's what is called for. It is still noteable, is sufficiently cited, and there aren't any other articles that would render this redundant. --Tautomers_{(T C)} 05:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• Keep; very awkwardly written, to be sure, and some of the content needs to go. Nonetheless, a lot of what's here is quite well-cited, and it's obviously a noteworthy topic. jp×g 10:00, 4 September 2021 (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.