Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slips (oil drilling)

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. (non-admin closure) — Music1201 ^talk 17:51, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Slips (oil drilling)

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

NN, unverifiable, no sources Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 05:20, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Obscure and specialised, but trivially verifiable. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:17, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Link to example product is added. Is that correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwolla (talk • contribs) 09:51, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A perfectly well-known term with more than can be described in an dictionary entry.[1][2] (several pages in both references) However, as an editorial matter, I suggest it would be better to include the material in Drill floor or Rotary table, or merge all three, and leave a redirect. However, my experience of merges is they are best done outside the ambit of AFD. Thincat (talk) 10:22, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - very easy to find sources. WP:BEFORE DeVerm (talk) 20:25, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:26, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This topic is verifiable. --Dcirovic (talk) 06:47, 10 July 2016 (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.