Talk:High pressure

Merge proposal: High pressure physics with High pressure

Support. We might need to spin it out again at a later date if the different contexts get confusing, but at least for right now one short article would seem better than two. - Eldereft (cont.) 00:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AHEM — Preceding unsigned comment added by NewgUySomeplAce (talk • contribs) 00:05, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was not merged. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:23, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to merge High-pressure chemistry to High pressure. High-pressure chemistry was once at Bergius process and Haber–Bosch process, WP:PRODed (seconded by me), and then soft deleted, but then asked to be restored and then was moved to the present title. Besides some cleanup and an attempt to bring the two topics (which have their own articles) together under some broader term, the article has not been expanded and still has only one source. I think the content here would fit in with the short article we have currently at high pressure. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:32, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. This is an unarguably notable topic with a large range of sources available for serious expansion. Books: [1][2][3][4][5][6][7], scholarly papers [8][9][10][11][12][13]. SpinningSpark 11:37, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose clearly a fundamental independent topic. Polyamorph (talk) 22:34, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - but late to the discussion, but agree with the above (I was the editor who originally created the link for Bergius process and Haber–Bosch process). We do have the articles Bergius process and Haber process (articles created in 2005 and 2001). What we don't have is an overview of high-pressure chemistry. Carcharoth (talk) 14:51, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The claim that "the article has not been expanded" is objectively untrue. Using the Wikipedia:Prosesize tool, the readable prose has gone from 253 bytes to 1268 bytes, an expansion of more than 500%. SpinningSpark 11:49, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I don't understand why the previous article needed to be restored and then moved; it makes more sense to me in this case to have simply started a new, well-sourced stub if an article at this title was the goal. To me, this is still a pseudo-list article with two entries with some fluff around them. In any case, I am happy to close the merge discussion and let the article be expanded and improved. I do think High pressure and High-pressure chemistry will need to be better integrated/cross-linked going forward. Thanks all for your input. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:23, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

See Talk:High-pressure chemistry#Proposed deletion for the rationale that led to the creation of this article. SpinningSpark 08:23, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]