Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Displacement field (mechanics)

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) Lepricavark (talk) 01:16, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Displacement field (mechanics)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Unsourced article about a technical subject. Possible hoax. » Shadowowl | talk 16:24, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 17:10, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Not a hoax [1][2][3][4][5]. XOR'easter (talk) 17:19, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A quick WP:BEFORE-style search shows that the concept of a displacement is a fundamental one in the theory of elasticity (.e.g., Linear_elasticity#Displacement_formulation), and a displacement field is the continuum version used in Continuum_mechanics#Displacement_field. GBooks and and GScholar searches of "displacement field" elasticity show many sources--XOR'easter has listed a few above and has usefully added a couple to the article. While one could debate whether it is better to keep the stub or merge to the continuum mechanics section, this is a clearly notable topic that more than suggests keep. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 08:56, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep similar to displacement (fluid), displacement in mechanics is important is elastic materials. --MaoGo (talk) 13:19, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It could conceivably be merged or redirected into another, larger article, but we can decide that at a later date. XOR'easter (talk) 15:51, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. it is not advisable to consider things in a technical field where one has no special knowledge to be a possible hoax. It's too easy to make mistakes like this. DGG ( talk ) 16:34, 29 July 2018 (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.