Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hermosa–Duhat–Balintawak Transmission Line


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Some of the comments given here don't make much sense, from an English-language perspective, but those arguments which are persuasive are for Deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 05:42, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Hermosa–Duhat–Balintawak Transmission Line

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I decided now to nominate this article for deletion, after thinking for some time. The article is essentially a recreation of a similar one that was deleted. Questionable notability, the only notability claim that uses sources that are independent of the subject or its owners is about a complaint by a Pampanga-based business group. Other than that, much of the article is an original research (WP:OR), and several of the sources are discouraged primary sources, most especially those connected to the power transmission firm and the surveys or studies that are considered primary (not secondary). Insufficient reliable sources that are independent of the subject or its owners or research firms, and secondary. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, IgnatiusofLondon (talk) 02:24, 22 February 2024 (UTC) Relisting comment: Relisting. I doubt we can get more editors interested in discussing the fate of an article about a transmission line but right now we need more participation. As for the discussion thus far, it's hard for me to make sense of it. Can we return to talk about sources? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.)  09:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * We can add it by adding inline citations and original source from the NGCP Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers)   •~Talk~•   •Contribs•  11:33, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Shonyx NGCP is not an independent source, right? We need more sources that are unrelated to the subject. NGCP is the operator of the transmission line itself, and its website is already non-independent of the subject itself. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:08, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I'am not owned this article, @Ervin111899 currently owned this article and I also add some of the missing information, adding some correct citations etc. Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers)   •~Talk~•   •Contribs•  12:09, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Shonyx note I mentioned you since you responded here and I need to get your attention in my response. Also, take note that no user can own a Wikipedia article, per WP:OWN, as Wikipedia articles are collaborative works.
 * Any way, the pre-COVID pandemic era article of the same transmission line – that got deleted – was also created by Ervin111899. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:18, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * What happened about the article was created in 2019 before pandemic Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers)   •~Talk~•   •Contribs•  01:37, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey @JWilz12345, what happened to the same article "Hermosa–Balintawak Transmission Line" since pre-COVID-19 pandemic. Is something wrong about the citations or lacking information. Since @Ervin111899 was after indefinitly blocked, due to abusing multiple accounts, he/him/their/they created the second article named Hermosa–Duhat–Balintawak Transmission Line but ended up as another deletion that mentions the article has lack of citations, external links or it can be lack of information in power transmission operators NAPOCOR, Transco, and NGCP. Their documents is privately secured and the inaacurate infos is in the said article. So thats why you have to nominate in the said article and possible deletion of @Ervin111899 as the articles not to be supposed by the viewers and even breaking the NGCP's property. Thanks a lot! -- Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers)   •~Talk~•   •Contribs•  10:12, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Shonyx read this. You seem to haven't visited the link I inserted at "was deleted" at the nomination paragraph above. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I visited twice. Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers)   •~Talk~•   •Contribs•  14:40, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  11:52, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Do I have to move the message? Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers)   •~Talk~•   •Contribs•  15:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: Final relist. We don't need editors extolling the benefit of secondary sources, which we all already know, we need opinions and arguments from editors on what should happen with THIS article. Without more decisive opinions, this discussion right now could close as Soft Delete or No consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:23, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment. @User:Liz I'm responding to Your call for participation and FWIW I'll try to find time over the weekend to take a look at this article. Pieces of infrastructure may be notable but don't necessarily need to be. For the moment I assume good faith in terms of the article. Hope to get back to You in a couple of days with some information. --Ouro (blah blah) 09:05, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 *  I must this page is to keep it  because some viewers curious in NLEX. Keep this page for all curious viewers Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers)   •~Talk~•   •Contribs•  08:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Shonyx unfortunately, much of the sources are not independent of the subject. NGCP and DOE are not counted as reliable sources because they are connected or related to the subject, thus the sources are non-independent and do not give weight to the notability of this article.
 * Also, too many original researches, which are discouraged, read WP:OR. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:39, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * National Power Corporation (NAPOCOR/NPC) and National Transmission Corporation (TransCo), although both were also involved in the transmission line and its associated projects when they operated and maintained the Philippine power grid (NAPOCOR/NPC from June 1994 to March 1, 2003 and TransCo from March 1, 2003 to January 15, 2009), are also not counted as reliable sources because they are connected or related to the subject thus the sources coming from them (or company name shown (none at all for the case of lands and rights-of-way (ROWs) or portions acquired and designated by NAPOCOR/NPC where it simply says "Danger: High Voltage Keep Away") on high voltage signs because that company was the one designated and acquired the lands where the structures/facilities are located and portions of a power line when the line and their structures are seen physically or on Google Maps) are non-independent. Ervin111899 (talk) 14:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * What about the original sources Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers)   •~Talk~•   •Contribs•  11:25, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The excessive use of the original sources can be discourage to viewers Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers)   •~Talk~•   •Contribs•  11:26, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Shonyx we need more secondary sources, like SunStar source used in the controversy section. Significant coverage of the transmission line in reliable, independent secondary sources will give more weight than non-independent sources (like DOE etc.) or primary sources (like NGCP, TransCo etc.). This ensures the article is neutral and not providing facts that unreasonably favor the people or organizations heavily connected to the subject, like NGCP and DOE. Secondary sources may include reputable news outlets or agencies, like Philippine News Agency, Rappler, GMA News, ABS-CBN News, or Manila Bulletin. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:36, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * @Liz we already have precedent, and that is Articles for deletion/Hermosa-Balintawak Transmission Line, targeting the article of essentially the same subject and was closed as delete. recreated this article, using primary sources and applied WP:original research. I should have nominated this recreated article earlier, but as they say, better late than never. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.)  08:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. The only notability claim that uses sources that are independent of the subject or its owners is about a complaint regarding the relocation of the line's San Fernando section by a Pampanga-based business group. Other than that, the article mostly contains primary sources (information that came from National Power Corporation (NAPOCOR/NPC), National Transmission Corporation (TransCo), and National Grid Corporation of the Philippines (NGCP) which are companies that were involved on a power line and its associated projects during their operations and maintenance (O&M) period on the line, whether on documents for the construction of a power line and its projects or physically (Danger: High Voltage signs placed on steel poles or lattice towers)). Ervin111899 (talk) 04:04, 8 March 2024 (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.