Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States oil politics


 * 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   merge to Energy policy of the United States. Courcelles 00:03, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

United States oil politics

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article is hopelessly original research and especially synthesis. The first section is simple factual info on US's importation of oil; however, it is included to imply (which the sources do not) that this effects US politics (I mean, yes, of course it does, but we cannot be the ones to synthesize that information per WP policy). The only other thing in the article is 2 extended quotes (rather than summary of those quotes) from limited sources, on very specific policies (information that could better be incorporated into other articles). In other words, to make this article comply with WP:OR and sourcing, I'd have to remove the entire thing except for the lead and couple of quotes. Since there is no underlying article that can be saved, it must be deleted until someone is willing to write an OR compliant version. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:05, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge - Salvage whatever factual information may be relevant to various subsections of United States, then delete. This isn't an encyclopedia entry, it's a policy paper. -- NINTENDUDE 64 03:24, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 05:03, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 05:03, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep – The article may have some forms of WP:SYNTHESIS in it, which would need to be corrected by editing, not deletion of the entire article. Northamerica1000 (talk) 09:36, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Except that there is nothing in the article that isn't synthesis except for 2 quotations. Qwyrxian (talk) 12:49, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge factual information to Energy policy of the United States and then redirect there. Beagel (talk) 04:14, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note - I second that proposal, with a specific redirect to Energy policy of the United States. I also think [Energy use in the United States] may benefit from the facts listed in this. -- NINTENDUDE 64 15:40, 15 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge per Beagel above. Regards, RJH (talk) 17:22, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge. This is irredeemably OR and synthesis. Wlse, it would simply be a list of--I don't know, names of pieces of legislation pertaining to oil? Whatever goes beyond that is for the blogs and the magazines, not for an encyclopedia. Drmies (talk) 22:55, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep If anyone actually reads the article, you'll see it is not Original Research, but quotes ambassadors and other reliable sources for information. Newspapers have been covering "oil politics" involving the United States for decades now.    D r e a m Focus  18:15, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect to Energy policy of the United States, per Beagel & Nintendude.--JayJasper (talk) 18:15, 20 September 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.