Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pond air pump


 * 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. The subject may be encyclopedic and worthy of an article, but the community judges that the article should be blown up so we can start over. causa sui (talk) 18:32, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Pond air pump

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Essay that serves as a coatrack for advertising a particular business. All external links are to the same business (presumable one that sells pond air pumps). Given the author's campaign of redirecting other pages to this page, it seems clear that advertising is the aim of this article. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 14:41, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with nom; nothing more than a coatrack to advertise pumps. Relevant and properly sourced material about pond pumps could be integrated with Koi pond. OhNo itsJamie Talk


 * Delete. Coatrack. Also how-to. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:09, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, for all the reasons above. There could perhaps be an encyclopedic article about aquarium air pumps, but it would need to be started from scratch, and such pumps for ponds are of trivial notability. Please note that there are redirects to the page (ie, air pump) that will also need to be wiped up. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:42, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Ill-considered advertising attempt. It's possible that the topic of pond pumps is notable ("water features" are quite popular around here among the suburban set), but this article needs a fundamental rewrite.  Del for now.  The Interior  (Talk) 17:46, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete There are a number of aspects of pond fish keeping that are notable, including the whole question of maintaining clear and well oxygenated water although as pointed out Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. There are plenty of other sites on the internet that serve that function. I agree with those that say that this is not even at the starting gate for an acceptable article - it isn't really about pond air pumps as such, let alone air pumps in general and the redirect from there is wholly unacceptable. It says, reasonably, that circulating surface water is the best way of achieving a healthy environment (though it should explain that is mainly through vertical rather than horizontal circulation) and in the same sentence recommends air pumps which are really another way of introducing oxygen - it does not say why an air pump is superior for ensuring vertical circulation to, say, a surface skimmer. Nor does it compare air pumps with the commonly recommended way of oxygenating water, the spray fountain. It does not mention the relevance of water depth and temperature, stocking levels and so forth, all of which should influence a decision on whether an air pump is desirable. There is no technical information at all that would be expected in an encyclopedic article on a class of equipment of this sort. And so on. --AJHingston (talk) 18:48, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep The topic is quite respectable and just needs work in accordance with our editing policy, which is to improve such articles, not to delete them. For an example of a substantial source which covers the topic in good detail, see Pond aquaculture water quality management.  Warden (talk) 18:51, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Right after the page was created, I tagged it for improvement (tags were subsequently removed) instead of nominating it for deletion, so I thought about that same issue. On further reflection, though, I see this more as something to delete and start over. I'm active at WP:WikiProject Aquarium Fishes, which includes a lot of aquatic hardware pages (Airstone, for a related example), so I think I have a feel for which kinds of apparatus are and are not appropriate for an article here. As AJHingston correctly described, there are plenty of apparatus that play a significant role in pond keeping, as covered by the book you cite, but air pumps play a very minor role in ponds (unlike indoor aquaria), so I'd rather see the topic covered as a section within a broader article instead of having a page devoted just to this kind of pump. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:03, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete (move to Wikiversity?). As it stands it's a how-to, and I don't see the intersection of pumps with this particular application meeting the threshhold for its own article -- there are zillions of uses for pumps and most of them are obvious. Details of specific applications almost inevitably slide into being a how-to. There may be a place in a sister project. EEng (talk) 22:37, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge Merge any parts that can be reliably sourced into Water aeration. This topic does not warrant a standalone article. --Epipelagic (talk) 22:54, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I would say this is quite informative, it could be improved, see WP:Imperfect. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 17:50, 8 November 2011 (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.