Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bamboo Bike Project


 * 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 with no prejudice against restoration for the purpose of merging if a suitable target should become available. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:31, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Bamboo Bike Project

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Questionable notability per WP:GNG. The current sources are all affiliated with the project or the university that sponsored it; thus they lack independence. My WP:BEFORE search yielded a few borderline sources. An article from SFGATE and another from Good.is both have a decent level of detail, but the publications are not the most reliable. A feature on bamboo bicycles from the NYT is good on reliability, but lacks in-depth coverage of this particular project. Further, all these articles are from 2007-2010, it looks like the project itself kind of petered out since then. An inactive project can still be notable per WP:NTEMP, but it seems unlikely this topic will become more notable in the future. Overall, I suspect Bamboo bicycles generally are notable, while this specific project is not. BenKuykendall (talk) 23:35, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. BenKuykendall (talk) 23:35, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. BenKuykendall (talk) 23:35, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. BenKuykendall (talk) 23:35, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. BenKuykendall (talk) 23:35, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ─ The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  18:07, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep, passes WP:GNG. In addition to the sources in the nomination, and the article in The Economist, there are several book sources.   SailingInABathTub (talk) 10:11, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete The correct guideline for organizations is WP:NCORP and not GNG. None of the references either in the article or mentioned by above meet the criteria as folows:
 * This cogito.org reference is based entirely on an interview, fails WP:ORGIND
 * This from The Earth Institute at Columbia University copies directly from the proposal submitted by David Ho, no "Independent Content", fails ORGIND. This from Columnia University (and other articles posted on Columbia University website such as this) all rely on information provided by people involved in the project. The references fail to provide "Independent Content". Fails ORGIND. Also failing ORGIND for the same reasons are this PR from the "Millenium Cities Initiative" who are "connected" with the project and this announcement, all of which fail WP:ORGIND.
 * This from SFGate is based entirely on an interview with a Calfee who is involved in the project, no Independent Content, fails ORGIND
 * This from Good.is only mentions the Bamboo Bikes Project in passing and focussed on an offshoot called Bamboo Bike Studio, fails WP:CORPDEPTH and ORGIND
 * This from The Economist talks about bikes made from bamboo and about the initial proof of concept project in Ghana (which is a different company named Bamboo Bikes Limited) but doesn't mention nor provide any information on the topic organization, fails WP:CORPDEPTH
 * Non-wood News (pgs 23 and 24) has two references. Issue 19 has a general article on Bamboo Bikes and mentions the topic organization in passing, fails CORPDEPTH. Issue 22 provides another mention and a simple single-sentence description of the topic organization and also fails ORGIND.
 * Pedal it! How Bicycles are Changing the World has a section on "Bicycles Made From Plants" where it discusses and describes bicycles made from bamboo. In a single sentence, it descibes how scientists Mutter and Ho founded the Bamboo Bike Project in Ghana to help factories produce low-cost, high-quality bamboo bikes. Fails CORPDEPTH.
 * Food and Sustainability in the Twenty-First Century: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives mentions the topic company in a footnote and copies information from the bamboobike home page and provides a link. Fails CORPDEPTH and SIGCOV and ORGIND.
 * In a nutshell, a lot has been written about bikes made from bamboo and there are a variety of organizations involved in the manufacture of these types of bikes, but this particular organization fails the criteria for establishing notability as per WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 20:30, 28 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete or Move to Drafts until the article meets Notability, which it currently does not (agree with comments above).--Greysonsarch (talk) 15:27, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge. Found a few more sources that I believe are not mentioned above:
 * Denver Post: https://www.denverpost.com/2007/06/21/a-sweet-ride-from-bamboo/
 * New Internationalist: https://newint.org/features/special/2008/11/01/bamboo-bikes
 * Columbia Magazine: https://magazine.columbia.edu/article/pedals-chutes-leaves )


 * But even though over all coverage appears to have been substantial, it doesn't look the project is active anymore (last blog post is from 2011), as the nominator says. For this reason an stand-alone article might not have a chance to develop much. I suggest merging content into the article of the leaders of the project, David Ho (oceanographer), which is currently undergoing its own AFC discussion but might have a chance of surviving, especially if the sources talking about him and the bamboo bikes are added there. Alan Islas (talk) 04:48, 1 April 2021 (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.