Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palmwood


 * 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. Whispering(talk/c) 21:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Palmwood
NPOV,verifiability This article contains no references at all. It brings all-good-news as a commercial brochure would. Most (>95%) of this article has been written in a single edit by a single contributor. I'm proposing to delete this article on the grounds of Verifiability and Neutral Point of View. --Philippe 14:26, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete . I'd like to point out violating neutrality isn't grounds for deletion- on the other hand, this article doesn't have any reliable sources to verify it. A Google search brings up no relevant third party publications and Lexis Nexis just brings up a bunch of stuff about the Blackberry. A search of "cocowood" brought up one story but nothing else. If other sources can be found, I will change my decision.--Wafulz 22:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Changing vote to Keep with cleanup --Wafulz 16:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep and clean up. I agree with Wafulz completely on the grounds by which we should judge this. Searching around, people definitely make products out of coconut palm wood, so having some sort of entry is reasonable. However, the article should be pruned back to what we can verify, even if that's a stub for now. William Pietri 00:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, but with major cleanup and re-write, and possibly re-name 'palm wood'. Palm wood - from many different species of palms, not just Coconut Palm - is an important commodity in tropical / subtropical regions (e.g. I've seen Date Palm Phoenix dactylifera wood extensively used as a structural timber in southern Morocco) - MPF 08:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I can live with a major cleanup i.e. removing almost the entire body of the article instead of deleting. This seems to be the consensus of this discussion. I will start cleaning up shortly, thus eliminating the need for deletion. --Philippe 11:01, 15 September 2006 (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.