Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of various type of power plants


 * 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. BJ Talk 03:33, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Comparison of various type of power plants

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

This article is in need of copy editing, lacks references, and may not be NPOV. Further, much of this content is or could be covered on the Power station page. At this time I feel this article has no real value. Revr J (talk) 18:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge to Power station. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:17, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete or Merge to power station. This article adds little reliably sourced content and lots of opinion. For instance, it compares the startup times for nuclear and fossil power plants and gives the nod to nukes for ease of start-up, which is doubtful and unsourced. Edison (talk) 19:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, or Merge to power station with considerable checking of facts and NPOVing, per Edison. Rwendland (talk) 21:52, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Reflecting, I agree a "merge" attempt is futile. There is just too much that is inaccurate, starting from scratch would be more reliable. BTW This article has no wikilinks to it. Rwendland (talk) 20:06, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - difficult to write an NPOV article with such a title. Deb (talk) 20:31, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Power station. Very important info, would be a shame to loose it. QuantumShadow (talk) 12:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I feel that a "merge" attempt is futile; there is are no references here and a lot of dubious (i.e. NPOV issues) and overall vague and poor quality points. Any content that isn't already covered elsewhere would need to be re-created from scratch. All this page offers is a concept: comparing the types more directly. If that's where we want to go, we should still delete and start fresh elsewhere. You can't really merge just a title. Revr J (talk) 19:45, 22 July 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.