Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pesticide drift and leaching in the Central Valley of California


 * 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.  Sandstein  18:42, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Pesticide drift and leaching in the Central Valley of California

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Another violation of WP:NOTESSAY from a UC Berkeley class. There is a very little in the article specific to the topic at hand, and a great deal of hand-waving. But the topic itself fails WP:N. StAnselm (talk) 12:41, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 12:44, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 12:44, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * The part of the nomination that I have doubts about -- and the key part for the purposes of any Afd -- is the nominator's statement that "the topic itself fails WP:N." When I Google "pesticide" and "Central Valley" -- as I assume the nominator has done -- there is news coverage of the impact of pesticides on residents in the area. Grist (magazine): "No, that’s not snow: Pesticides coat California’s Central Valley" (2012); The New Republic: "How Gross Is My Valley: America’s toxic agricultural capital" (2010). The New Republic piece is especially detailed. And then of course there's the citations on the article such as Pesticide Drift and the Pursuit of Environmental Justice (MIT Press, 2011), whose abstract indicates that California agriculture is the focus. Central Valley (California) is "California's single most productive agricultural region and one of the most productive in the world." Wherever you have factory farming on such a vast scale there are going to be issues with pesticides. Here in Canada, there've been many articles and at least one documentary on pesticides and health in tiny Prince Edward Island, for example. Anyway, whatever problems there may be with the article, it is exploring a notable topic, from what I can determine. Keep. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:09, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, I intentionally referred to the broader concept of notability rather than WP:GNG. WP:NOTESSAY is also part of notability. So, yes - I see some hits, but that would only be enough to mention the Central Valley in the Pesticide drift (which is very thin - why wasn't that expanded instead?) - not a standalone article. StAnselm (talk) 13:17, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, NOTESSAY is often confused with Notability because of the shortcut WP:NOT -- it's why we have a hatnote on the policy page to clear that up for people. They're both part of policy but not notability, necessarily. One can write an essay that's unencylopedic on a notable topic. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:27, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * And as for Pesticide drift, that's an article on the science of how pesticides drift. This is more like Environmental effects of pesticide in the Central Valley of California, per Category:Environmental effects of pesticides -- and something very like that would make for a much better title, if kept. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:50, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:40, 14 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. The article itself is an overly broad essay that is already covered by topics such as pesticide drift or other articles dealing with environmental effects in general. Any sources that do mention that location (including Google mentions above) do not establish a unique WP:GNG for pesticide issues in this location. In terms of pesticide issue notability, this topic would be equivalent to having an article every time a regional newspaper reports on a flu outbreak and saying that qualifies for a Flu outbreak in X state article. This location would have a long ways to go to warrant its own article. Kingofaces43 (talk) 14:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete The general topic is notable (Pesticide drift), there is no evidence that its impact on this specific region is especially notable. – Train2104 (t • c) 15:29, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with above comments
 * Keep California's Central Valley is likely the most important single agricultural area in the world. See this Wiki section for just a bit of the evidence for this, and the scale of pesticide use, its proximity to large populations of workers and residents, and the interactions of agriculture with California's unique approach to toxics regulation All point to super-notability! --EJustice (talk) 08:06, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it's fair to point out that User:EJustice has a significant COI as the instructor of the course which produced this. StAnselm (talk) 09:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Changing my vote, the regional legislation and significance for national food supply support notability, I checked HeinOnline and the laws in this region have been covered sufficient to satisfy WP:GNG including California's Pesticide enforcement program and The Regulation of Pesticides in California Seraphim System  ( talk ) 01:28, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Recommend Renaming this article to something less technical and more understandable, specifically "Pesticide Regulations in California" which does meet WP:GNG but can still use most of this article for background. I would be willing to contribute to help expand and clean up some of the POV language in the article (like changing "Trump administration" to EPA, etc.) Seraphim System  ( talk ) 01:28, 17 April 2017 (UTC)


 * move and repurpose. The current title is much too narrow for encyclopedic treatment. It results in synthesis of more general materials.  We already have an article Environmental impact of pesticides.  However this is big enough already so the article here could be renamed to Environmental impact of pesticides in California. The section "Burden shared by marginalized communities in the Central Valley" looks to be original research, but that is easily fixed by deleting that section only. The alternative to repurposing to a broader topic would be to delete, but there is some useful material here worth preserving. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:53, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment. Would a merge/redirect to California Department of Pesticide Regulation be called for, given the degree of overlap? Neutralitytalk 05:21, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The article title itself doesn't seem to overlap any more with that than pesticide drift, etc., so a redirect really isn't appropriate here. Kingofaces43 (talk) 14:58, 19 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment my guess is the topic is broader then appropriate - it would also seem borderline WP:SYNTH except in the specific context where secondary sources establish a relationship between an observed effect of regulation or a regulatory outcome and a policy implementation - for example, there are sources that discuss how the EPA's statistical methods impact regulatory outcomes, but that is graduate school level material - there could be something to add at California Department of Pesticide Regulation, but I think Environmental impact of pesticides in California would likely be a better choice. Seraphim System  ( talk ) 06:03, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I took another look through the article, and nothing really passes WP:DUE muster for environmental effects. Nothing really would be merged into California Department of Pesticide Regulation either since that article already covers the same content (though that article itself needs a rewrite). Kingofaces43 (talk) 14:58, 19 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Response: thank you for all of the recommendations. We appreciate the feedback in order to make the page stronger and more relevant.  We're willing to comply with several of the requests; the first of which being changing the name of the page.  However, this seems difficult to do.  Can anyone help with that? Irenekeller
 * Generally, it's better not to change an article's name while a deletion discussion is going on. If there consensus is to keep the article under a different name, the person who closes the discussion will probably move it. StAnselm (talk) 20:51, 20 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. The current version is not specific to the topic; the earlier version was, but it was a cross between advocacy and a term paper. This has been a perennial problem with some courses in the educational program--what is suitable for a class paper will rarely be suitable for an encyclopedia . A class paper is normally intending to prove a thesis, but we do not do this.  DGG ( talk ) 02:13, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete I was going to recommend merge to pesticide drift, as the topic makes a much better sub-heading within the general article, than a standalone article; however, the current format is very much that of arguing a thesis, as pointed out above - using a variety of sources that are all applicable but not specific to the topic, while pulling in bits of information from the firmament at large to bolster a point. Strip that unsuitable structure away, and very little is left here.-- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:03, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Additional comment. Just a note that the article had been recently moved to Environmental Effects of Pesticide Use in California. Given that there hasn't been consensus for a move/redirect here, I've moved it back to avoid even more confusion. Kingofaces43 (talk) 22:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete/ take back to the sandbox to turn it into an encyclopedic format. Reads like an opinion piece and not an encyclopedia article right off the "is a cause for concern." and finishing with "What's at stake in California There’s about a half million expectant moms and 2.5 million children under age 4 in California that could be at risk from toxic residues of chlorpyrifos on food" Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 22:52, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. An encyclopedia is not a showcase for student writing or a vehicle for activism. Ifnord (talk) 10:07, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Certainly pesticide drife and Central Valley agriculture are important topics. This article, however, has a WP:SYNTH problem, failing to show that pesticide drift in the Central Valley is an independently notable topic.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:42, 26 April 2017 (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.