Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF URANIUM MINING IN NAMIBIA


 * 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 the article named Uranium mining in Namibia, where the originally nominated article was moved, and delete this implausible redirect, early closure since the nom has been withdrawn and the initial article has essentially been deleted and replaced by another article, good work. - filelake shoe &#xF0F6;  15:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF URANIUM MINING IN NAMIBIA

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This is an essay, not an encyclopedia article. Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:19, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * In light of the massive changes to the article since this AfD began, I think this nomination can be withdrawn. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 13:16, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. ---  RepublicanJacobite  TheFortyFive 17:43, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per the comments above, after the significant rewrite. ---  RepublicanJacobite  TheFortyFive 14:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 27 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I have put it up for speedy deletion. There is a section about uranium in the Mining in Namibia but before we have an article on Environmental impact of uranium mining in Namibia lets get started on Environmental impact of uranium mining and Uranium mining in Namibia. Testing the waters, quality not quantity, cart before horse and all that. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 03:41, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - An essay, not an article. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:43, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, because it's an essay, also because many sentences in the article are copied from the sources which may be a copyright problem. Peter&#160;E.&#160;James (talk) 15:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC) Keep as the article has now been improved. The redirect can be deleted. Peter&#160;E.&#160;James (talk) 11:24, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as an essay and per Alan Liefting. Beagel (talk) 07:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep as it was significantly improved. Beagel (talk) 12:42, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. I renamed it Uranium mining in Namibia and gave it a lead paragraph with appropriate inline refs. There's plenty of info on "Uranium mining in Namibia" and I'll expand the article in the next couple of days; it's just too late here to work on it anymore. The Rossing section needs to be reworded and sourced. Agree that the "essay" paragraphs should be deleted as I have the same concerns about possible copyvios. --Rosiestep (talk) 05:47, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep I removed the copyvio sentences / paragraphs from one source, and since then Dr Blofeld has built upon Rosiestep's work to create a decent article on the topic. The original deletion concerns are no longer valid. BencherliteTalk 11:12, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah this capital title can simply be nuked now and the AFD closed.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:21, 30 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep per The Heymann Standard (and delete the redirect). Nice work. --kelapstick(bainuu) 11:23, 30 May 2012 (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.