Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piran Dam


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 16:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Piran Dam

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Small dam which does not meet WP:GNG. Has been tagged for notability since April 2010; however, no improvements were made for establishing notability. No English search results, except different wikies based on this page. There may be more deep coverage in Farsi. Beagel (talk) 17:49, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, notability not an issue here. There are other proofs to the existence of the dam, see http://cdm.unfccc.int/UserManagement/FileStorage/49QB1KCA3X5WO8MFP6GETUR7IV2Y0H, http://www.climate-change.ir/en/CDM.asp --Soman (talk) 15:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 21:52, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 21:53, 19 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - As a hydroelectric generation plant and dam, notability can be assumed; and sources are very likely to be found in Farsi. Systemic bias may be an issue. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:15, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Not every hydroplant and dam is notable, particularly in the case of micro- and small hydro projects. You can't just asume a notability of every micro- and small scale project. If there are sources satisfying WP:GNG, the article should be kept. Otherwise, it should be deleted. During almost four years nobody has provided any reliable third party source providing a significant coverage addressing the topic directly and in detail. The CDM project page, provided by Soman, provides a coverage, so it may meet the criteria, but it would be helpful if there will be also third party sources. As for Systemic bias, it may be an issue, of course, but unlikely. During the last four years, members of WP:DAMS, particularly user:NortyNort has expanded all similar stubs created by the same author. Remained only stubs where no sources available. Beagel (talk) 06:15, 24 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Very small dam which does not meet WP:GNG. Given the growth trend for renewable energy plants, notability cannot be simply assumed, or else things would quickly get out of hand. Johnfos (talk) 03:33, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of power stations in Iran or just delete. I did a similar AfDthree years ago on a plethora of planned dams in Iran. Hard to find information on these and it is a small hydroelectric plant. I have worked on many of these articles and expanded what I could. If we don't delete or redirect it will be four more years!... of stub status...--NortyNort (Holla) 14:10, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Withdrawn my nomination. Minimum notability is established although it needs more third party sources. Beagel (talk) 18:49, 3 February 2014 (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.