Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternative fuel sources
- 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 of the debate was REDIRECT. Homey 23:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Apparent original research on the subject. The subject of the article is already addressed by alternative fuels. —C.Fred (talk) 22:24, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to alternative fules; there is a biog so not entirely OR. --Robdurbar 22:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The OR allegation is made over passages like this in the text: "I think that Canada should be seriously investing in these sources and starting to adapt to them since it is inevitable that soon we will need them and it is better to be ready when it happens." There probably is useful content on the page that can be merged into alternative fuels; it just can't be merged wholesale (like B.Wind says). —C.Fred (talk) 23:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I don't think this mess is worth salvaging, even for a merge. I'd be passing aspirin to the person who'd do the merge on this one. B.Wind 23:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to alternative fuel. Merge anything worth saving. —Viriditas | Talk 01:44, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect and merge anything useful into established article alternative fuels Elizmr 20:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect and merge nothing of this obvious WP:OR. Sandstein 18:33, 2 June 2006 (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.