Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gallery of Lewis structures in 3-D

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 delete. MBisanz ^talk 19:22, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery of Lewis structures in 3-D

The diagrams on this page are a novel and misleading representations of molecular bonding. Therefore, they constitute original research. The text on the page is in a non-encyclopedic and unprofessional style. The page has been dicussed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemistry and there is a broad consensus against this article. Cacycle (talk) 20:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. These are novel (and IMO confusing) representations of bonding, and therefore constitute original research. Yilloslime (t) 20:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Original research. The conclusion from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Chemistry looks correct to me. QuiteUnusual (talk) 20:45, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 20:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as OR (actually, substantially misleading and/or factually-incorrect OR) per my comments on page noted by Cacycle. DMacks (talk) 21:23, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this seems to be original research, and not particularly useful original research at that. I've always been quite comfortable with most chemical structure methods and I found this one confusing and somewhat misleading. ~ mazca ^t|c 22:27, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. OR and misleading. --Bduke (Discussion) 23:03, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete (userfy?) as material that is probably interesting and relevant somewhere but doesn't by itself form an encyclopedic article. JJL (talk) 02:29, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Departs significantly from the way Lewis structures are presented in textbooks and therefore constitutes original research. --Itub (talk) 06:34, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Everything in the article is misleading. I also don't like how ribonucleotides are labeled "A-DNA" and "T-DNA". Narayanese (talk) 07:35, 12 October 2008 (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.