Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agriculture in Alaska


 * 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 Speedy keep per criterion 1. I withdraw this nomination, as the article has been significantly improved in the last few days. (non-admin closure) KSF  T C 20:32, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Agriculture in Alaska

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has no sources, and it isn't clear that the subject is notable. It might be viable, if sources could be found, but the article would need to be rewritten anyway. As it is, it reads like a how-to guide. KSF T C 16:27, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep, perfectly notable topic and is standard in every state (see Category:Agriculture in the United States by state. Even has its own category Category:Agriculture in Alaska. Article needs to be improved with references and history of agriculture, economic impact of agriculture and especially change the lede (article is not about gardening). —Мандичка YO 😜 14:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * It is not standard for every state; only a few other states have pages like this, and those that do have sourced articles with encyclopedic information about agriculture, not OR lists of gardening tips. Even if there were 49 other articles just like this one, other stuff exists is not a good reason to keep a bad article. KSF  T C 14:53, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I pointed out the article content sucks and should not be about gardening. WP:DELETIONNOTCLEANUP. Yes, agriculture in the largest state in the United States is a notable topic, especially because of its unique weather and the government and scientific research that has gone into cultivating farms there for 150+ years. You need to follow WP:BEFORE and actually look for sources before you create an AfD.  —Мандичка YO 😜 15:48, 27 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep, no shortage of reliable sources available for this topic. Nom should be aware that the criterion for AfD concerns the topic as it is in the world, not the state of the article, however lamentable. but it's a cleanup job, not AfD's. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:45, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Has been noticeably improved since nominated for AfD. Paste  Let’s have a chat. 11:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed it has (thanks), but that's not the reason for keeping, it's that the topic is inherently notable. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:58, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Completely agree, Passes WP:GNG I just felt that you needed a mention. Paste  Let’s have a chat. 15:00, 29 November 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.