Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Japanese water


 * 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. czar ⨹   19:48, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Japanese water

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Originally PROD'd as essay/original research with one supporting PROD and a second more stinging PROD. PROD was removed by author with no improvements. I agree with the sentiments. Non-coherent un-encyclopedic article. Peter Rehse (talk) 17:25, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: I get the impression that this is a machine-translated version of an article at the Japanese Wikipedia. הסרפד  (call me Hasirpad) 01:26, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:24, 12 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Rambling essay filled with original research, and not really appropriate as an encyclopedia article. I'm sensing a pattern here with new articles created by the same enthusiastic editor, a large number of which have either already been deleted or are up for deletion, and I see that the editor has been briefly blocked once for repeatedly creating new articles without paying more attention to the basic Wikipedia guidelines. --DAJF (talk) 03:07, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I noted this at Articles for deletion/University clubs in Japan. Mudslides in Japan is hanging on for now, but that's mostly because no one has bothered to put it up for deletion as suggested at User talk:Dekimasu. Dekimasu よ! 03:33, 12 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete A mish-mash of confused English practice. Since almost all the references are in Japanese, I followed one -- on the utterly unbelievable claim that Japan "imports" (?!) 60% of its water (whatever that could possibly mean). It turns out that the claim on the Japanese environment ministry's website is that Japan is only self-sufficient for 40% of its food in calorie terms, and thus the 60% of "virtual water" used to grow this food is "imported". So this bit is wrong, basically. I expect the rest is similar. Imaginatorium (talk) 03:50, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2014 December 14.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 21:46, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTESSAY. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  23:48, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTESSAY. This is a very clear essay and should not be an encyclopedia article. BenLinus  1214 talk 01:26, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
 * With respect to Hasirpad's suspicion and the two untranslated Related Pages wikilinks, I checked the respective What Links Here on jawp ja:特別:リンク元/自然農法 (Natural farming) and ja:特別:リンク元/有機農業 (Organic farming), giving close attention to 水 (water). Only ja:冬期湛水 (Winter waterlogging) and ja:炭酸水素ナトリウム (Sodium bicarbonate, Japanese calls hydrogen "water element") are found. It might be that jawp used to have such a counterpart but have been deleted.
 * Anyway delete Sourced parts might possibly be salvaged to their separate topics, but together at this state is a WP:TNT at best, and easily gone with WP:NOTESSAY per above.  野狼院 ひさし  Hisashi Yarouin 12:51, 15 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - my seconding of the proposed deletion is all I have to add. Bearian (talk) 18:17, 17 December 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.