In situ electron microscopy: There is nothing called "in situ electron microscopy" the same way there is nothing called "in situ x-ray diffraction".  It is just the ability to use the EM while doing an experiment.  The references are about that, doing an experiment while imaging or characterising, i.e., using the EM.  FuzzyMagma ( talk ) 18:33, 2 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions .  FuzzyMagma ( talk ) 18:33, 2 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Essentially an WP:OR topic name.  UtherSRG (talk) 19:06, 2 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Traditionally, electron microscopes examine samples in stable configurations, after careful preparation.  The article is specifically about imaging with an electron microscope in a dynamic environment, like while an experiment is taking place.  The topic has significant coverage separate from electron microscopy in general, see review article book1 book2 conference .  I agree the article does not introduce the subject very clearly at the moment, but the topic has enough coverage that I think it can be improved.  〈 Forbes 72 | Talk 〉 03:00, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Forbes72 Environmental scanning electron microscope is a good example of what are you trying to say when talking about developing a microscopy for a specific test.  and - quoting the review article that you mentioned - " The recent advances in in situ methods, including liquid and gas sample environment, pump-probe ultrafast microscopy , nanomechanics and ferroelectric domain switching the aberration corrected electron optics as well as fast electron detector has opened new opportunities to extend the impact of in situ TEM in broad areas of research ranging from materials science to chemistry, physics and biology. In this article, we highlight the development of liquid environment electron microscopy .. (PS: I linked the developed EMs) to expand on the example, the environmental scanning electron microscope (ESEM) is an example of in situ microscopy, specifically for studying samples in their natural or hydrated states. Traditional electron microscopes typically require samples to be in a vacuum, which can alter or damage certain materials or biological specimens. However, ESEM allows for imaging samples in a controlled environment with variable pressure, enabling observation of materials and biological samples without extensive sample preparation. thus, "in situ microscopy" as a thing does not exist but developing instruments to allow for in situ testing exits. the article is about the first The article should not exists the same way that an article about "Operando X-ray" should not. Cheers .. FuzzyMagma ( talk ) 14:15, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The Environmental scanning electron microscope article does indeed mention in situ techniques. Along these lines, I guess you could try and merge all the in situ information into the individual articles for specific kinds of electron microscopes, as you seem to suggest. But since "in situ electron microscopy" is addressed as the main topic of secondary scholarly sources, having a similarly scoped article on Wikipedia mentioning the applications of in situ measurements for individual microscopes (TEM, ESEM etc.) is not just a a neologism . A singular "in situ electron microscope" might not exist as a distinct physical object, but I don't think that's a good reason to delete an article, since we have plenty of Wikipedia articles about scientific techniques. 〈 Forbes 72 | Talk 〉 14:13, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . A quick WP:BEFORE style search turns up a review article "Frontiers of in situ electron microscopy" and and a couple of books In-situ Electron Microscopy: Applications in Physics, Chemistry and Materials Science , and chapter 1 of "In-situ Electron Microscopy at High Resolution" as decent-looking secondary RS for the field of in situ EM.  The field thus seems notable.  I think the crux of the dispute here is the researcher's POV.  For some, EM technology is most important and the specimens studied are secondary.  For others, the specimens are the important thing and the kind of EM used is secondary.  For the latter, the ability to analyze specimen dynamics in situ is the important thing and so for them, situ EM is a bona fide field.  -- {{u| Mark viking }} { Talk } 17:49, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Would be particularly good to see response to the most recent sources posted.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Nosebagbear ( talk ) 21:07, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] keep as I searched in the browser I got many results in this topic so keep this article as it can be improved MICHAEL 942006 ( talk ) 18:33, 16 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Quantity of sources is not relevant.  Quality, with regard to WP:42 is.  - UtherSRG (talk) 18:49, 16 August 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.

Discussion outcome: keep