Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valencia mine


 * 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. Tone 08:10, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Valencia mine

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is no evidence that there is, was or will be an actual mine on this site. It has only been an exploration target http://www.uranium-network.org/index.php/africalink/namibia/173-valencia-mine/378-valencia-mine-in-namibia Scott Davis Talk 04:27, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete more suitable to be included information at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_mining_in_Namibia#Valencia - there is nothing apart from a 2011 report - JarrahTree 04:34, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:19, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. This reports the project laying off workers and this from the Namibian Uranium Association gives the details of its history. Maybe the article should be renamed, but there is really no case for deletion. SpinningSpark 13:16, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable. It seems to be an exploratory mine that once employed 30 people. May be notable in the future if the price of uranium rebounds and the mine actually begins to operate. Sources above are one report of reducing the number of workers and another PR-type piece in a non-independent organization. Fails to meet GNG. MB 02:58, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Enough coverage to satisfy WP:GNG (e.g., please see, which provides a lot of references to The Namibian, Allgemeine Zeitung and Die Republikein). However, I propose to merge this article and Namibplaas mine and rename the merged article Norasa uranium project as these two projects are merged. Beagel (talk) 11:30, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't see this source as adding any independent coverage. WISE is an organization whose stated mission is "a world without Nuclear Power" and they seem to track everything going on in the uranium industry. Isn't this more of a blog than independent journalism. MB 03:05, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The WISE's site provides references to The Namibian, Allgemeine Zeitung, Die Republikein etc. It is not important what WISE says, it is important that a number of Namibian newspapers have wrote about that mine. If these newspapers have published these articles about this mine, that is enough for WP:GNG. The fact that WISE is biased or how they select their sources does not disqualify these newspapers per se. Beagel (talk) 18:41, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I would support Beagel's rename and merge suggestion. SpinningSpark 13:16, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Satisfies GNG. James500 (talk) 17:51, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 05:57, 28 September 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep: meets GNG per sources already present in the article. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:32, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, w umbolo   ^^^  21:35, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets WP:GNG with significant coverage from The Namibian and The Globe and Mail. —  Newslinger  talk   04:35, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Umm. The only reference from the Globe and Mail is in 2011 which is about a possible takeover of Forsys Metals and mentions the Valencia deposit once, in paragraph 9 of 15 (Namibia is also in paragraph 3). --Scott Davis Talk 04:49, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
 * While the word "Valencia" only appears in the article once, the entire article discusses the uranium deposit in Namibia, which is the basis of the Valencia project. —  Newslinger  talk   14:36, 10 October 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.