Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bore pitch

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 merge‎ to Bore (engine). Star Mississippi 02:05, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bore pitch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I searched but it was hard to tell whether this is notable - it has been uncited for over a decade Chidgk1 (talk) 16:23, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering and Transportation. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:23, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• This might be at the wrong title, but I'm not sure why we'd need to remove an article explaining a mechanical engineering parameter. I got true positives for both "bore pitch" and "bore spacing" at Google Scholar, TWL, Gale Academic, and Springer. Got results for "bore spacing" at Jstor. Close to twenty inbound links to the article, and I'm not seeing a suitable merge target, with the caveat that I'm not a mechanical engineering.
  I think this is clearly an engineering concept we should explain somewhere, even if it's not important enough to earn its own academic studies or book chapters. Folly Mox (talk) 00:45, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 17:30, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:17, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with Bore (engine). The Bore article is very short and sweet, but this is clearly a closely related concept that doesn't need a separate article. Some of the content is unencyclopedic but the topic should be at least mentioned at target. --‡ El cid, el campeador ^talk 19:53, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge never goes out fo style. Two short articles related to each other are ripe for a merger. Prefer to merge over deletion. Bearian (talk) 01:41, 1 November 2023 (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.