Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of landfills in Hong Kong: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 17: Line 17:
*'''Keep'''. A notable topic in my view, and useful for anyone studying the subject. Our lack of similar articles is not a reason for deletion; I would welcome the writing of more. [[User:Calliopejen1|Calliopejen1]] ([[User talk:Calliopejen1|talk]]) 23:39, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. A notable topic in my view, and useful for anyone studying the subject. Our lack of similar articles is not a reason for deletion; I would welcome the writing of more. [[User:Calliopejen1|Calliopejen1]] ([[User talk:Calliopejen1|talk]]) 23:39, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Wikipedia is [[WP:NOT#DIR|not a directory]]. This article is a directory listing of non-notable landfills. As inappropriate as a list of non-notable apartment buildings, gas stations, or restaurants in Hong Kong. No references to show that the whole collection of landfills in Hong Kong is notable. If the ultimate disposal of refuse is a problem for Hong Kong, that (referenced) fact could be mentioned in the article on the place. A listing of locations does not convey that information. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 23:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' Wikipedia is [[WP:NOT#DIR|not a directory]]. This article is a directory listing of non-notable landfills. As inappropriate as a list of non-notable apartment buildings, gas stations, or restaurants in Hong Kong. No references to show that the whole collection of landfills in Hong Kong is notable. If the ultimate disposal of refuse is a problem for Hong Kong, that (referenced) fact could be mentioned in the article on the place. A listing of locations does not convey that information. [[User:Edison|Edison]] ([[User talk:Edison|talk]]) 23:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per [[WP:NOT#DIR]], mostly. Landfills are generally not important ''individually'', and cat's would serve the same purpose. <font color="#cc6600">[[User:David Fuchs|David Fuchs]]</font><sup> <nowiki>(</nowiki><small><font color="#993300">[[User talk:David Fuchs|talk]]</font></small><nowiki>)</nowiki></sup> 23:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:59, 9 January 2008

List of landfills in Hong Kong

List of landfills in Hong Kong (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

I'm just not sure this page is necessary. We do not have lists of landfills in any other locations (although we have categories for landfills, US landfills, and UK landfills) and none of the individual landfills here seem to be notable. h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 22:28, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep that there are categories for landfills is an indicator that it's not considered a mundane topic-- nor should it be. For those who think that the topic is "boring" Lists of landfills should be thought of as "lists of places that house the tons and tons of garbage we dispose of every day". It doesn't all disappear into thin air. In the case of densely populated, tiny Hong Kong, the problem takes on special significance. Mandsford (talk) 01:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not saying that it's mundane. What I am saying is that it seems strange that we should single out Hong Kong when we don't have such a list for any other location.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 03:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And also none of the items on this list appear to have any stand-alone notability, failing WP:LIST.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 03:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No one is making any claims that this is a boring topic, it's just not necessary. Perhaps if there were articles on each and every landfill in Hong Kong (which I think would be yet another issue), but the items on the list, as HisSpaceResearch notes, just go to short stub articles regarding the city or location of each one. I can't find how this violates WP:LIST, but it surely isn't notable. Tanthalas39 (talk) 04:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not notable. If we listed every landfill on the planet we could account for a lot of garbage, but to what purpose? A large apartment building houses a great number of people who collectively make an enormous impact on their community, but I don't think we'd want a list of every apartment building in Hong Kong (There isn't such a list is there?). Maybe notable landfills, such as the one in Centralia, Pennsylvania that caught fire and caused the town to be abandoned, would make an interesting resource.--Jeff Johnston (talk) 03:03, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Useful as list because the landfills are unlikely to have enough information for separate articles (and this has date and size information too). I don't know why there aren't similar lists for other places, but I think there should be; see WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST. Compared to (say) apartment buildings, there aren't so many so as to make it unwieldy; many more people contribute to a landfill than live in an apartment building. It's a pity there's no reference but there's probably information that could be found in official documents. I don't see how it violates WP:LIST either, could you cite the part you're referring to? Rigadoun (talk) 05:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone has said that it violates WP:LIST so there's nothing to cite. So far all the delete arguments have been based on notability. There are about 10,000 landfill sites in Canada, which would make for an enormous list, but would it be notable as a list? The number of landfills, the volume of garbage, the environmental impact, etc are all (arguably) notable and would make for an interesting entry, but I would still argue that the list in of itself is not notable. --Jeff Johnston (talk) 15:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
His Space Research above wrote "And also none of the items on this list appear to have any stand-alone notability, failing WP:LIST," and I didn't understand what he meant by that. Rigadoun (talk) 18:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JERRY talk

contribs 22:32, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. A notable topic in my view, and useful for anyone studying the subject. Our lack of similar articles is not a reason for deletion; I would welcome the writing of more. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:39, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Wikipedia is not a directory. This article is a directory listing of non-notable landfills. As inappropriate as a list of non-notable apartment buildings, gas stations, or restaurants in Hong Kong. No references to show that the whole collection of landfills in Hong Kong is notable. If the ultimate disposal of refuse is a problem for Hong Kong, that (referenced) fact could be mentioned in the article on the place. A listing of locations does not convey that information. Edison (talk) 23:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:NOT#DIR, mostly. Landfills are generally not important individually, and cat's would serve the same purpose. David Fuchs (talk) 23:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]