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 redirect to Electrorheological fluid. —SpacemanSpiff 18:09, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Electrorheology[edit]

Electrorheology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This page has multiple issues, mainly that a page Electrorheological fluid already exists to explain the effect and applications, that the page Electrorheology reports on just one groups work, and that a citation to this work has already been removed (in Jan 2009) from Electrorheological fluid Aarghdvaark (talk) 18:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect - if the disputed content is removed, it would leave only a dictionary definition, and it looks like only one article is needed. Additional context should be provided in the Electrorheological fluid article - this could include a mention of electrorheology. Peter E. James (talk) 22:28, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and redirect to Electrorheological fluid. Same proper topic, no content needs be merged. - 2/0 (cont.) 23:32, 26 January 2011 (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.