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 delete. Sandstein 07:02, 30 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quantum Tunneling in DNA[edit]

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

A mess; full of unsourced content and content based on primary sources, each of which is strung together to make WP:SYN claims. (it ~looks~ like a WP article, but it isn't) The student who created this moved to mainspace, I then draftified it with a comment on the talk page. The student has moved it right back. This doesn't belong in mainspace; might be ready with a lot of additional work Jytdog (talk) 05:59, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 06:48, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 06:48, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draftify again, pitch in an even more explicit note. Has potential but needs cleanup. The actual topic of the article is only being addressed in the second half - there's far too much of a run-up that should be replaced with judicious wikilinking to the corresponding topics - and as noted, the sourcing is unsatisfactory. Since this editor is part of a Wiki Ed project [1] I assume there is hope for some incentives from the coordinator and teacher end to actually bring this up to scratch. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:36, 22 March 2018 (UTC)*Reply[reply]
Delete - As much as I hate to torpedo a student's well-meaning attempt, I don't think this is ever going anywhere. I don't doubt that quantum tunneling can happen with DNA but just because process X is notable and molecule Y is notable doesn't mean that X in Y is notable, even when there are papers documenting that it happens. We don't have articles on Hydrogen bonding in DNA, Nucleophylic attack in DNA, or Van der Waals stacking in DNA even though papers abound on all three. Likewise, the second example given in the article isn't even happening in DNA - it happens in a protein-associated nucleotide cofactor, so I guess we should split this and have another article on Quantum tunneling in nucleotide cofactors. Or not. Agricolae (talk) 07:59, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete. Nothing to indicate that quantum tunneling is special to DNA in any way that does not apply to chemistry in general. Anything specific can be added to the mutation article. SpinningSpark 12:17, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perhaps the best place to put the first part is Keto–enol tautomerism#DNA, a section of that article in desperate need of expansion anyway (it only mentions the failure to recognize the phenomenon delaying Watson & Crick's DNA structure solution, failing to mention it is a primary cause of mutations). The second example would go with the page for the relevant enzyme, photolyase. Agricolae (talk) 15:30, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draftify It seems like this topic would be better suited to incorporation into other articles (one possibility that came to my mind was the "Mechanisms" section of Mutagenesis). On its own, it's very essay-like: the needless re-explanation of what a mutation is, etc. Of course, this is to be expected for student writing (and I don't want to discourage students!), since that may well be the only style of formal writing they've ever done, and they've had it drilled into them for years. I suggest moving the content back to Draft space, from which it can be parceled out appropriately with necessary edits. After all, there's no rule that says a draft page has to be a draft for a single, specific, complete article. XOR'easter (talk) 15:44, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can support that, as long as the close makes clear that moving the draft back to this title would not be acceptable. SpinningSpark 16:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm posting about this at WP:Education noticeboard; some of the other creations of Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Northeastern_University/Advanced_Writing_in_the_Health_Professions_(Spring_2018) will likely have similar issues. power~enwiki (π, ν) 16:20, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete. I came here from seeing the note at the Ed noticeboard. It seems to me that there is little to be accomplished by draftifying a student project, because typically the student editor will be gone at the end of the semester, when it would just end up at MfD. And WP:NOTTA. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:56, 23 March 2018 (UTC)Reply[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.