Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1980s in science and technology

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) — Yash! ^(Y) 03:02, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1980s in science and technology

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

Only a list of years in science. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:37, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Shouldn't this have just been WP:PRODed? KDS4444^Talk 02:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1970s in science and technology. The topic is valid and encyclopedic, the page needs expansion not deletion. -84user (talk) 03:16, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Basically nothing links to this article except (some of) the other decade pages. (And List of years in science, which itself gets incoming links mostly from the year articles.) Wouldn't this be better handled as a navbox? Opabinia regalis (talk) 03:51, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Qualifies per WP:LISTPURP as a functional navigational aid for Wikipedia articles. This makes it easier for Wikipedia's readers to find content they're looking for. Furthermore, the list is expandable, and a valid rationale for deletion has not been presented in the nomination. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:06, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- per precedent of the survival of the 1970s category, which was a "Snow keep". We commonly have such list articles. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:47, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Valid topic, just needs expansion. Dimadick (talk) 06:27, 7 May 2015 (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.