Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Internal Market in Electricity Directive (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Consensus is that the article subject is notable. Splitting can be discussed outside of AfD. (non-admin closure) (t &#183; c)  buidhe  09:02, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Internal Market in Electricity Directive
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable Chidgk1 (talk) 08:08, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Definitely notable, just not sourced. All EU directives have massive coverage in multiple languages in RIS. Mccapra (talk) 08:33, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per above and here are a few sources which might help . Bingo bro   (Chat)  10:02, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep The nominator does not provide any support to document why he considers this to be 'non-notable' and therefore gives no real rational for delete. Directives issues by the European Parliament are the legal acts which detail the laws within the EU and (in my opinion) are generally going to notable on that basis alone (i.e. they are the fundamental laws of largest political and economic union in the world). Disregarding this there is still plenty of coverage on this particular topic to warrant notability.        Tracland (talk) 07:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment There is no doubt that the article could be better sources and could be improved but this is not itself a reason to delete the article. Unfortunately I don't know enough about the topic to make the necessary improvements.Tracland (talk) 07:17, 9 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Split into separate articles on all of the three (yes, three - Directives 96/92/EC, 2003/54/EC and 2009/72/EC!) separate pieces of legislation which are discussed by this one single article. Some of those pieces of legislation may not be independently notable, but it is virtually impossible to make any sort of reasonable decision on whether the subject of the article is notable, when the subject of the article is so many different directives - and yet the infobox only talks about one of them! Naypta ☺ &#124; ✉ talk page &#124; 09:41, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:29, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:29, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:29, 9 July 2020 (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.