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 Jerk (physics). I took the liberty to perform the merge myself. And I will also redirect the other two, since there is no content apart from the definition. Tone 09:02, 15 March 2020 (UTC) reply

Crackle (physics)

Crackle (physics) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Does this have any practical uses?? Georgia guy ( talk) 01:30, 7 March 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 03:17, 7 March 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 03:17, 7 March 2020 (UTC) reply

• 'Speedy merge both this page and Pop (physics) to Jounce, or that page as well to Jerk (physics), all largely redundant and notional. The quoted source says enough: "The fifth and sixth time derivatives are sometimes somewhat facetiously referred to as crackle and pop" There is no useful physical meaning to this, certainly not enough to support an article. Speedy because Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crackle (physics) (3rd nomination) had a clear consensus to merge yet no one ever did so... Reywas92 ^Talk 03:35, 7 March 2020 (UTC) reply

• But that was only four years ago. Merges need to be done with great care and deliberation to avoid changes that are too sudden. Thincat ( talk) 10:26, 7 March 2020 (UTC) reply

• Merge I checked the terminology and merge is correct as suggested by Reywas92. Lightburst ( talk) 01:58, 8 March 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment – if it helps, I made this page consistent with the format of Pop (physics), if the brevity of the page compared to Pop was part of the problem. Paintspot Infez ( talk) 17:54, 12 March 2020 (UTC) reply

Alternative proposal – Also, here's an idea: how about we just merge Crackle (physics) and Pop (physics) into one article titled " Crackle and pop"? Thoughts? @ Georgia guy, Thincat, Lightburst, and Reywas92: Paintspot Infez ( talk) 17:54, 12 March 2020 (UTC) reply

And jounce is also short and consistent with these, combine them all. Reywas92 ^Talk 18:06, 12 March 2020 (UTC) reply

• Merge to Jerk (physics)]. XOR'easter ( talk) 19:19, 14 March 2020 (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.