225:
There are sufficient references for the notability of the overall topic, the items are adequately encyclopedic content, they can be sourced from both primary and secondary sources. that really should be the end of the discussion--except for the above comment that one particular user doesnt think its
226:
a notable subject, in his personal judgement. And the nom's comment about WP NOT DIR-- I can not see how this is in any sense a directory--to what? That's a novel argument in the rash of deletions on similar subjects, possibly because all other versions of WP NOT have been tried and failed.
174:
book has chapters like "Nanotechnology in the Age of
Posthuman Engineering: Science Fiction as Science" and "Less is More: Much Less is Much More: The Insistent Allure of Nanotechnology Narratives in Science Fiction". I'll add some material to the article before this AfD closes.
151:
and clean up. A notable theme in fiction, beefing up the first paragraph and adding some references regarding the general use of nanotechnology in fiction and science fiction would be a good idea – as would cleaning out some of the worst cruft.
212:
Nanotechnology, in this case, is "magic". Centuries from now, children might learn about how nanobots were programmed by a kindly old scientist to temporarily transform
Cinderella's garments, with default setting to commence at 2359 hours.
73:
68:
257:
as an article that dicusses nanotechnology as a plot device, but not as yet another I spy "x in popular culture" list. There are plenty of sources and notability for this subject. I have
127:
164:
The article needs a lot of work, but journal articles like "Teaching
Societal and Ethical Implications of Nanotechnology to Engineering Students Through Science Fiction"
100:
95:
104:
191:
87:
194:
Google
Scholar hits for "nanotechnology+fiction". Even if just 1% of these articles relate to this article, that is an abundance of reliable sources.
294:
277:
265:
249:
237:
217:
200:
181:
156:
142:
52:
17:
171:
91:
168:
309:
36:
134:
A trivial unsourced dumping ground for anything related to nanotechnology in fiction. Also, Knowledge (XXG) isn't a
167:
and "Microscopic
Doctors and Molecular Black Bags: Science Fiction's Prescription for Nanotechnology and Medicine"
83:
58:
308:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
261:
removed the IPC list, and I encourage editors to write about this subject in prose, not as a list. --
290:
274:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
258:
135:
286:
214:
195:
176:
165:
233:
139:
262:
49:
121:
246:
153:
228:
302:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
74:
Articles for deletion/Nanotechnology in fiction (2nd nomination)
170:
show that the article's topic is notable and verifiable.
117:
113:
109:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
312:). No further edits should be made to this page.
69:Articles for deletion/Nanotechnology in fiction
8:
66:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
65:
24:
1:
295:23:53, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
278:02:40, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
266:18:52, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
250:10:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
238:07:26, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
218:01:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
201:19:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
182:19:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
157:19:04, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
143:18:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
53:01:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
329:
245:per DGG and Blathnaid. --
84:Nanotechnology in fiction
59:Nanotechnology in fiction
305:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
190:Also, there are almost
64:AfDs for this article:
285:as per Blathnaid.
320:
307:
125:
107:
34:
328:
327:
323:
322:
321:
319:
318:
317:
316:
310:deletion review
303:
98:
82:
79:
62:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
326:
324:
315:
314:
298:
297:
280:
268:
252:
240:
220:
206:
205:
204:
203:
185:
184:
159:
132:
131:
78:
77:
76:
71:
63:
61:
56:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
325:
313:
311:
306:
300:
299:
296:
292:
288:
284:
281:
279:
276:
272:
269:
267:
264:
260:
256:
253:
251:
248:
244:
241:
239:
235:
231:
230:
224:
221:
219:
216:
211:
208:
207:
202:
199:
198:
193:
189:
188:
187:
186:
183:
180:
179:
173:
169:
166:
163:
160:
158:
155:
150:
147:
146:
145:
144:
141:
137:
129:
123:
119:
115:
111:
106:
102:
97:
93:
89:
85:
81:
80:
75:
72:
70:
67:
60:
57:
55:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
304:
301:
282:
270:
254:
242:
227:
222:
209:
196:
177:
161:
148:
133:
45:
43:
31:
28:
273:per above.
287:Edward321
215:Mandsford
197:Bláthnaid
178:Bláthnaid
136:directory
140:RobJ1981
128:View log
275:Biophys
263:Phirazo
101:protect
96:history
50:John254
259:boldly
210:Delete
105:delete
192:2,500
122:views
114:watch
110:links
16:<
291:talk
283:Keep
271:Keep
255:Keep
247:Itub
243:Keep
234:talk
223:Keep
172:This
162:Keep
154:Artw
149:Keep
118:logs
92:talk
88:edit
46:keep
229:DGG
126:– (
293:)
236:)
138:.
120:|
116:|
112:|
108:|
103:|
99:|
94:|
90:|
48:.
289:(
232:(
130:)
124:)
86:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.