Talk:Bioelectrography

Redirect to Kirlian photography

It is probably best to make this a redirect to Kirlian photography. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:29, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Deletion?

I don't personally see why it needs to be deleted since the term does exist, but I don't know enough about the topic to defend it, so I'll just back it up for future reference. As suggested above, rather than outright deletion it may be better to redirect the term and shift its content into kirlian photography. Tyciol (talk) 19:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

There is already a lot of Korotkov-content in the article Kirlian photography. I am not convinced that the term exists independent of Korotkov, but I think a redirect is to be preferred over deletion. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. I'll go ahead and replace the PROD tag with merge tags. RJC ^{Talk Contribs} 14:22, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

For reference if there is any discussion regarding the merge, the PROD tag originally said, This article has some notability issues. It seems to fall under WP:FRINGE and fail WP:V. This does not seem to be an area of research with a large number of investigators. I remain convinced that WP:FRINGE should govern the tone and content of whatever is merged into Kirlian photography. Given the verifiability issues, a liberal application of the {{fact}} tag might be warranted. RJC ^{Talk Contribs} 14:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

The article about Korotkov has been deleted now after discussion on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Konstantin Korotkov. I redirected Bioelectrography to Kirlian photography. I propose to do the same thing with Gas Discharge Visualization. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 08:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I had missed that one. Good call. RJC ^{Talk Contribs} 19:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)