Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Litter in the United States


 * 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.  The Nordic Goddess Kristen  Worship her 02:13, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Litter in the United States

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

unreferenced POV fork, unlikely search term, best covered in other articles ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:50, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I split it from the litter article to avoid systemic bias issues. The article has some references and lack of any referencing concerns can be resolved by adding a undefined tag or adding refs. Lack of referencing is not a valid reason for deletion. With regards to POV I feel it is no more POV than any other articles such as Environmental issues in the United States, Climate change in New Zealand etc. As for being an unlikely search term I would argue that it is exactly the sort of term that would be used to search for such information. If the info if merged back into the litter article or elsewhere we will be back to systemic bias issues. Also, if it were to be merged back it will have to be split out at some point in the future since WP is always growing in size. Should we also merge the Litter in the United Kingdom and Litter in New Zealand in other articles? There is much systemic bias in WP that makes WP US-centric.-- Alan Liefting (talk) - 07:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions.   —-- Alan Liefting (talk) - 07:44, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I can't say that I understand the "systemic bias" argument as an excuse in favor of making separate articles about littering in the U.S., Britain or New Zealand. I'd see it as an argument against inferring that English-speakers are different from the rest of the world when it comes to throwing trash on the ground.  Mandsford (talk) 14:34, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The info about litter in the US made up a significant portion of the article before I split it out. Systemic bias is lessened by giving it its own article and making all the info about litter in specific countries about equal in terms of coverage in the main litter article. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:22, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Sourceable certainly. Reasonable editorial decision?  Maybe not, but that's not what AfD is for.  Hobit (talk) 23:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Excellent article. The issue of litter is important in American thought, viz the patriotic song "America the Beautiful", Trash of the Titans (featuring U2) from the Simpsons, America as a source of Green thought in general, and et cetera. Please see articles recycling and container deposit legislation.  --Mr Accountable (talk) 00:52, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. A notable subject for almost every country. Biophys (talk) 04:52, 23 January 2009 (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.