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. Also, rename to Well cementing. (non-admin closure) — ΛΧΣ21™ 13:46, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well Cementing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Per WP:NOR. No sources whatsoever, appears to be a guide of sorts. Swordman97 (talk) 23:02, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This was nominated for deletion less than six hours after it was created. I think it has potential and should be given time to improve. As to notability, a cursory search turns up thousands of journal articles and tens of thousands of books. Here are some books you could use as sources: Working Guide to Drilling Equipment and Operations, Structure and Performance of Cements, Standard Handbook of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering, Well Cementing, and Well Cementing. Papers include Well Cementing Techniques in East Sichuan, Oil-Well Cementing, An Investigation of Oil-Well Cementing, Cementing Oil and Gas Wells, Part 3, Chemical Shrinkage of Oil Well Cement Slurries. Also, I seem to remember a certain oil spill for which faulty well cementing was responsible.[1] Let's get writing. Braincricket (talk) 02:01, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep A technical subject that is important to oil, water, gas and geothermal drilling, and should be well-referenced in technical literature. Thie article needs improvement and should be referenced and copyedited rather than deleted. Acroterion (talk) 20:59, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 20:53, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 20:53, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. It always amazes me (although I suppose it shouldn't, given the demographics of Wikipedia editors) how the minutiae of the software industry are nearly always unquestioned as acceptable topics for articles but major topics in other industries are questioned. We don't (or, at least shouldn't) delete articles on topics that have been the subject of books from mainstream publishers. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to Well cementing  This is a major topic in the news right now, associated with fracking.  A search on [fracking "well cementing"] gives this as the first ref.  Even though the nomination is not for notability, nominators should look for sources before starting an AfD discussion.  The tens of thousands of sources found by the first editor to try to look for sources is not a surprise.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:12, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.