Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Modern cities


 * 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. Jayjg (talk) 01:37, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Modern cities

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Essay Eeekster (talk) 00:55, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete essay  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:32, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:16, 28 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete: An essay. Joe Chill (talk) 14:51, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as an essay (complete with "In conclusion" paragraph). I thought that the title might be good for a redirect, but I can't find a suitable destination. EALacey (talk) 18:00, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Our articles are supposed to be essays so the nomination is incomprehensible and not a reason to delete - please note the lack of any reference to policy . The article contains a good source to support the content and there are literally thousands of books devoted exclusively to this topic.  The article just needs some TLC to integrate it with our other similar articles about architecture and planning such as New town. Colonel Warden (talk) 10:39, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:NOT and WP:NOT.
 * WP:NOT: Wikipedia is not for "Personal essays that state your particular feelings about a topic (rather than the consensus of experts). Although Wikipedia is supposed to compile human knowledge, it is not a vehicle to make personal opinions become part of such knowledge."
 * WP:NOT: Wikipedia is not for "Primary (original) research such as proposing theories and solutions, original ideas, defining terms, coining new words, etc. If you have completed primary research on a topic, publish your results in other venues, such as peer-reviewed journals, other printed forms, or respected online sites."
 * It's worth pointing out that the word "Dubai" cannot be found in the only reference currently cited, making the entire thing WP:OR. Is that sufficient references to policy? Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 05:45, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You fail to demonstrate that this article is original or personal. As a specific point, you object to the inclusion of Dubai.  I haven't got the references listed in the article to hand so I just search afresh and it is trivial to find numerous sources to support the article's example such as Cities of the Middle East and North Africa: a historical encyclopedia‎ &mdash; "The origins of the modern city of Dubai are..."; National Geographic, volume 148‎ - Page 509 &mdash; "Today Dubai is a modern city with every amenity".  You fail to demonstrate that we cannot improve the article by summarising the many such sources and fail to demonstrate that the blunt instrument of deletion is necessary in this case.  All I'm seeing is WP:IDONTLIKEIT, not policy. Colonel Warden (talk) 07:08, 30 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Textbook example of an essay, something we don't host, please read WP:NOT.  PLEASE.  JBsupreme (talk) 21:02, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * A textbook example of a WP:VAGUEWAVE, unsupported by any evidence or examples.  WP:NOT is, in fact, not applicable because the author does not present his personal feelings upon the matter and cites the sources which he has drawn from. Colonel Warden (talk) 00:20, 31 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete It's just an essay, chock full of WP:OR; the only encyclopedic content is the first sentence, which is a rather obvious definition. Mangoe (talk) 22:07, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, rewrite, or stubbify We shouldn't keep personal essays in the mainspace, so deletion would be a viable outcome. Since a well-written article on this subject would be appropriate, I wouldn't be opposed to keeping the article if it were rewritten before the end of the AfD. Stubbifying it to the first sentence would be another appropriate choice.  Them  From  Space  01:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, essay, original research, etc. Clearly not appropriate for an encyclopaedia.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 07:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC).
 * Delete. "Modern cities are cities of the present day"?  Sounds like the lede for a WP:COATRACK article about something only tangentially related, which, sure enough, it is—an essay (school paper, perhaps) about issues the author thinks Dubai may be facing.  This isn't remotely encyclopedic.   Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 07:27, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Unsourced essay which appears to lack any real scholarly basis, and seems to consist mostly of advice for those considering a move to Dubai.  Acroterion  (talk)  02:24, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Rewrite The article has a few decent facts. It just needs to be rewritten so that it is not in essay form. Dragoneye776 (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2010 (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.