Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Råshön wind farm


 * 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. Yamamoto Ichiro (talk) 05:51, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Råshön wind farm

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The only reliable source that I can find is the official site. Schuy m 1 ( talk ) 23:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Small, non-notable wind farm, as are many in List of wind farms in Sweden. Johnfos (talk) 00:17, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge/Redirect to Offerdal. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 04:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Sweden does not have very large wind industry. On global terms, the plant is small, but it is quite standard for Sweden due to a tendency to size them to 10 MW. Notable enough by virtue of context. --Adamrush (talk) 01:57, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That does not make the article pass any of the guidelines or policies. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 02:02, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Small wind farms can be included in List of wind farms in Sweden, but should not have an article of their own. Where would we be if Wikipedia tried to have a separate article on every 10 MW wind farm? Things would get out of hand very quickly. Johnfos (talk) 02:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That's just the thing. The list found in List of wind farms in Sweden shows pretty clearly that it won't get out of hand, because there are simply so few fish in the pond. All of these farms you have tagged have been notable enough to be featured in print media (Svenska dagbladet, Ny Teknik) and on the Internet. You need not worry that the articlespace will be flooded with tens of thousands of Swedish wind farm articles, disrupting Wikipedia's intended role as a Pokémon encyclopedia. --Adamrush (talk) 13:43, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. The tagged wind farms are notable enough to be on the list but not to have a separate article. A reference or two should be included in their listing, to support their inclusion. I say again that things will quickly get out of hand if we try to have an article on every small wind farm around the world. There literally are thousands. Johnfos (talk) 18:22, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Adamrush makes a convincing argument, and there's no real reason to delete. Fumoses (talk) 23:09, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes there is. It doesn't pass WP:NOTABILITY which is a policy. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 23:10, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:25, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:25, 18 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! :)  19:12, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete As per Johnfos' observation. Ecoleetage (talk) 04:33, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~   L'Aquatique   [  talk  ] 04:34, 21 October 2008 (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.