Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ethanol and global warming

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. kurykh 01:03, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ethanol and global warming (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This was Prodded as an interesting but non notable essay about a single research study. Prod was removed, but it is worth reaching a fuller consensus. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:57, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Aren't you supposed to considered merging before deletion? Why would you just throw away someone's contribution? If this doesn't stand alone and you can't wait for it to grow, merge it with bioethanol. Juzhong (talk) 23:02, 12 November 2008 (UTC) or corn ethanol[reply]
  • Comment as it stood, no-one would ever find it. It is orphaned and needs a lot of help. I am not a subject expert so will not make the attempt. A valid outcome of the AfD process is often that a knowledgeable editor adopts the article and enhances it or merges it. Thus Wikipedia benefits from what many perceive to be a destructive process. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:08, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Articles for deletion is a better place to find subject experts than bioethanol or an appropriate wikiproject? Juzhong (talk) 23:12, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • It becomes highlighted by virtue of being listed here. Experienced editors tend to spend time in these pages. However this is not the place to debate this. Here we should discuss deletion or retention. If you want to discuss philosophy then my talk page is open to you. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:17, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or smerge— basically an essay placed here. Nothing that much different than in Global warming or ethanol. MuZemike (talk) 23:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Article describes only new research not reported in a peer-reviewed journal. The research was done on behalf of the Illinois Corn Marketing Board — hardly a neutral voice in the ethanol debate. Once (meaning if) the research is published in a RS, it could be included as a sentence or two in Ethanol fuel. - Atmoz (talk) 23:34, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per User:Atmoz. αЯβιτЯαЯιŁΨθ ^(talk) 00:03, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 01:12, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Any relevant information belongs in the appropriate article. This is a contrived topic. ie. Ethanol and hunger, ethanol and government subsidies, ethanol and sugarcane, ethanol and brazil. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:11, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Its original title was Upload file (or similar). I moved it to the current title because that was the headline. I agree with the fact that info belongs in the right article. The name of this article is currently, at best, a "holding name". With the original title I suspect, but cannot find, a copyright violation. It;s interesting, but probably not significant, that the creator created one item, this one, and has done nothing since. 07:21, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Topic may be notable but this is not a usable start, and is basically a fragmentary essay.DGG (talk) 16:52, 14 November 2008 (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.