Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agriculture in London


 * 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The result was  keep and tagged for merge to Geography of London, nom withdrawn anyway. NAC. Cliff smith talk  00:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Agriculture in London

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article has seen virtually no development in over two years, and remains both a stub and an orphan. It has no information that could not be merged elsewhere; I've saved the article, and will have a look for a larger article it might be worth supplementing. There are no corresponding articles for other major cities. Yohan euan o4 (talk) 20:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep No proper reason to delete is provided. The nominator makes vague promises to do something with this material but does not explain how deletion will assist in this. Colonel Warden (talk) 22:51, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Topic is notable. The fact that it lacks development is not a proper reason for deletion.— Chris!  c t 23:07, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Just because an article is notable doesn't mean it deserves an article. All I'm saying is that I think this article was created in error - merge this into Geography of London, if it becomes too unwieldy, then give it its own article: see Geography of London, Geography of New York City, but no corresponding articles for Los Angeles, Paris, or Mexico City because it served no utility in breaking them off. The London and NYC examples are justified under WP:SIZE; this one wouldn't be, presuming it had been added to Geography of London in the first place. Topics of such a specific nature as this don't warrant creation when the information could be found in a more comprehensive article - it doesn't help the reader or the editor. As for the lack of development, I brought attention to that because I feel it just confirms that it should have been integrated in to GoL in the first place. Yohan euan o4 (talk) 07:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * If you really believe it should be merged into Geography of London, you could start that discussion. Merging issue shouldn't be handle through AfD.— Chris!  c t 18:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll withdraw this nomination and set a tag to merge. Yohan euan o4 (talk) 19:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - Wikipedia has no deadline, and being a stub is in no way a reason to delete. Admittedly it's of rather limited scope, and merging in to an article such as Agriculture in the United Kingdom/Agriculture in England would be preferable, but since they don't exist, it should be kept, really. AllynJ (talk | contribs) 23:42, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  00:54, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. No reason why this couldn't be expanded into an interesting short article. Stephen Turner (Talk) 11:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - This article is limited, but what it really needs is a rescue tag. It needs some work, but could be a fascinating, multi-layered article, particularly if anyone wants to edit to include ag. groups to which farmers in London join, markets, etc.  It's quirky, but a keeper in my opinion.Yachtsman1 (talk) 09:19, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I had seen something on this, and found it. I made some changes to the article.  Urban farming has become a hot topic, for the simple reason that the closer the food is to urban areas, the lower the transportation costs are, and the lower the cost of food becomes.  I would definitely consider keeping this article as is.Yachtsman1 (talk) 09:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Nominator makes no case. JASpencer (talk) 17:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep -- this is a perfectly legitmate article. It just is that the subject is a small one, because London is so heavily built up.  I regard allotments as a variety of horticulture, rather than agriculture, but that would not be sufficient even to delete that section of it.  I would oppose merging it with a wider article, because the subject would be ignored by it, as so many other counties are far more engaged in agriculture.  Peterkingiron (talk) 21:25, 14 September 2008 (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.