Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Small 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   keep. Consensus here holds that there is plenty of reliable information available to produce a viable encyclopedia article here. ~ mazca  talk 12:27, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Small farm

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

As stated this is an unofficial definition of a term, the article does not establish notability and the term does not fit with the taxonomy described in Farm typology as linked. This term does not exist in Wiktionary but it does not look like a good candidate. It is unlikely to be expanded to be of any real encyclopaedic value in the future and should be deleted. Ash (talk) 17:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * keep. I adapted the text from a public domain glossary of terms which was written to educate U.S. Congressional staffers on United States agricultural policy.  I have no emotional attachment to this article, but the content does seem encyclopedic and appropriate.  But I'm not an expert at AfD policy so I'll wait to see how this conversation develops.  Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 17:52, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep I think the distinction and concept of a small farm is quite notable. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Very notable concept with a lot of expansion potential - it could be turned into a GA or FA given the amount and quality of sources. It's a global agricultural policy issue, see the results for "small farm policy" at Gscholar, Gbooks, .edu domains, FAO sites . Novickas (talk) 20:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * speedy keep. (changed my previous vote.) Kudos to Novickas for making huge improvements to this article.  Ash was justified to doubt the original version, but Novickas has removed all doubt as to its propriety.  Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 21:26, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - I was going to vote delete, but didn't realise the amount of available information available on this subject. There is, as mentioned above, a lot of potential here. Spongefrog,  (I am a flesh-eating robot)  16:59, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Certainly exists as a concept, and can a lot of potential to be expanded. That the term does not fit with the Farm typology article taxonomy is a non-issue because of WP:CIRCULAR.  That article is just the USDA’s Economic Research Service's farm classification, and it is not the final word on the types of farms that do or do not exist.  Narthring (talk  • contribs) 18:39, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * comment the last !vote was made two weeks ago. Is it time to call the question?  Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 05:35, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - No prejudice to the nom, but the topic isn't one for abuse, and is mentionable under a lot of criteria. It doesn't look bad now either. Shadowjams (talk) 09:36, 5 September 2009 (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.