Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Condominial sewerage


 * 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. Additionally, the potential for a merge can be further discussed on an article talk page. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 00:22, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Condominial sewerage

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Page was created in 2007. Since then, it has not been edited in any real sense; indeed, the last edit was a bot "removing non-applicable orphan template" in 2009. So either this article is so perfect it needs no editing or it's so obscure that no one can be bothered. (I found it as a Random Link.) At best, I suspect this may be no more than a dicdef, though my knowledge of sewage as a topic is not, I admit, wide ranging or deep. Emeraude (talk) 15:55, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Latin America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * In my view the article should be kept. The term is similar to "simplified sewerage", and the term "condominial sewerage" is more common in Latin America with a slightly different connotation. If one looks for "condominial sewerage" the article provides a succinct summary as to what it means and thus is useful.--Mschiffler (talk) 16:36, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 17:20, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment Little in the way of valid reasons for deletion; I don't think dicdef applies because the topic can be treated in an encyclopedic fashion (assuming sources can be found, and Google suggests there are some albeit in technical and academic publications). The real question is whether this is too similar to simplified sewerage to merit a separate article, but I doubt that question will be decided in the time of this AfD. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:53, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

This article should definitely be kept and expanded. http://www.wsp.org/sites/wsp.org/files/publications/global_goodsewerscheap.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.155.21 (talk) 12:40, 5 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep but there should really be more than just one citation. Possible search terms include "sistema condominial de esgotos", "esgoto condominial", "alcantarillado de condominios". World Bank Report #34812 Agua (October 2004) would be a useful source, in Spanish here. --Bejnar (talk) 19:01, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, slakr  \ talk / 03:59, 6 June 2014 (UTC)




 * Merge - I'm sure there are people in the world who enjoy reading about sewage systems, but with as little content as there is and as few views as the page gets, I think this information would be a better fit on some other, more general page about sewage. Bali88 (talk) 05:07, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. I found two more references; probably more if one searches for "condominial sewers" instead of using the term "sewerage". Valid encyclopedic topic. Essentially a different approach to sewerage systems. Since it is two words, hard to see it as a dictionary definition.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 20:09, 9 June 2014 (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.