Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Libano-Arisai Wildlife Management Area


 * 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. Black Kite (talk) 14:58, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Libano-Arisai Wildlife Management Area

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Notability not established and cannot find any substantial coverage. It is not mentioned in (Shearman 2008), which includes a list of PNG's WMA's. The name is listed in a couple of documents, sometimes described as "proposed", but nothing more. Current stub doesn't clarify anything (location, size, whether it was gazetted) and does not meet Wiki standards being unreferenced, POV, uncategorised, etc. ELEKHHT 06:55, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete Non notable mediocre and not sourced article -- Camilo S&aacute;nchez Talk to me 03:43, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment – See WP:NRVE: articles lacking sources does not equate to non-notability. Also, is your statement that the topic is non-notable based upon source searching and WP:N, or is it based upon your personal opinion? Northamerica1000(talk) 07:43, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 02:39, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

 Keep source http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/where_we_work/new_guinea_forests/news_new_guinea_forests/?84160/New-protected-areas-for-Papua-New-Guinea clearly describes project which seems notable--Kieranian2001 (talk) 12:34, 31 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - This topic passes WP:GNG:
 * News sources
 * Making a living out of conservation
 * Exploring Mount Bosavi’s secret wonderland of animal life (This article includes information about the three protected areas)
 * UNESCO sources
 * Kikori River Basin / Great Papuan Plateau


 * A UNESCO .doc paper only viewable after downloading it – www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=nom%20du%20bien%20%3A%20kikori%20river%20basin%20%2F%20great%20papuan%20plateau&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CCcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwhc.unesco.org%2Fpg.cfm%3Fcid%3D326%26l%3Dfr%26%26state%3Dpg%26action%3Dbrief%26order%3Dregion&ei=IbpBUPDkJsisiALwkIH4BA&usg=AFQjCNG7PPaWONFmowek15Krs28Vaei5CA
 * Additional articles about plant and animal species, protected species and indigenous peoples within these areas:, , , , ,.
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 07:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmm, what's the point of dropping here so many links, none of which does actually prove the existence of a WMA named "Libano-Arisai" ? Only two of your links actually mention something similar, namely a short listing of a "Libano WMA (8,250 ha)" according to UNESCO, and "Arisai (4,661ha)" by WWF 2006. Still completely unclear what we are dealing with, one or two WMAs, exact location, status, etc. -- ELEKHHT 08:06, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * There's no such place titled "Libano-Arisai Wildlife Management Area". Apparently the creator of this article devised this title. Look closer at the sources, and notice how the first source specifically use the names Libano and Sulamesi, both of which are in the Mount Bosavi region. The second source includes information about the general Mount Bosavi region, including Sulamesi. Both of the UNESCO sources use both names (Libano and Sulamesi). It's quite likely that more sources are available, which take time to locate. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment – Here's some more sources:
 * PNG communities protect 80,000 hectares of rainforest
 * New protected areas for Papua New Guinea (2005)
 * New protected areas for Papua New Guinea (2006)
 * Protected Areas establishment in New Guinea – Protected Areas on Volcanoes (Scroll down)
 * Papua New Guinea adds 12 new protected areas (Press release from WWF)
 * — Northamerica1000(talk) 08:22, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment – The article has been improved from the state it was in at the time of this nomination. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You just stated above that "there's no such place titled "Libano-Arisai Wildlife Management Area"" so "keep" cannot be the right answer. Either merge to Mount Bosavi (if anything is worth merging), or rename, so that the scope of the article becomes clear.-- ELEKHHT 13:48, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Adding external links which do not support the text under the section "References" is not an improvement, rather confusing. -- ELEKHHT 00:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge to Mount Bosavi. MaNeMeBasat (talk) 07:55, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The merger of the two sentences would need to be careful though as none of the "references" added by Northamerica1000 into the article actually support the text. IMHO would be much better to delete the now spammed stub. Anybody willing to do some proper work in expanding Mount Bosavi, can find and use those sources. -- ELEKHHT 00:51, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 07:45, 8 September 2012 (UTC)




 * Delete - The fundamental problem we face is one of verifiability which I do not see as being met by any of the sources. At this point, we cannot even confirm this WMA exists, and none of the sources support this specific WMA as existing.  As for a merge, I fail to see a need for merge.  Northamerica1000 can add the material directly to Mount Bosavi without need of a merge. -- Whpq (talk) 17:02, 12 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - Do no merge. I agree with Whpq above with verifiability, particularly with the issues raised above with regard to the name of the protected area. I too have doubt that the article name is the actual name of the protected area. It would be inappropriate to merge the protected area article with the mountain article; the protected areas should have their own article. Until more certainty is developed about the WMAs, particularly until we are sure they have been established, their proposal should only be mentioned in the mountain article. I think both these issues may be an issue related to this being a wildlife management area (as opposed to a national park or other more significant protect area) in a developing nation. I wrote stub articles on all the WMAs of Idaho and had difficulty doing so because of the lack of information about protected areas that are not of that great of national importance or recognition. Seeing this, you could understand why it is so difficult to find info on a WMA in Papua New Guinea. Also, what is the date of the most recent reference? Fredlyfish4 (talk) 00:53, 16 September 2012 (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.