Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minor irrigation project

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Premeditated Chaos (talk | contribs) at 07:45, 14 March 2020 (→‎Minor irrigation project: Closed as redirect (XFDcloser)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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 redirect to Irrigation in India. ♠PMC(talk) 07:45, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Minor irrigation project (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reason North8000 (talk) 22:40, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed as new article patrol. This is about a classification term for irrigation projects in India. Only one secondary source given and IMO insufficient to establish wp:notability for this as a separate topic. This article consists of two sentences which I added to the Irrigation in India article so no material or references would be lost.

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:47, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Caveated keep/delete - If Minor irrigation project is deleted, then perhaps Major irrigation project should also be deleted. As such, both are referred to in Irrigation in India.
Dealing solely with the merits of whether this article meets WP:NOTABILITY (which is the only cause for proposed deletion claimed by the proposer), it appears that the article should be presumed to be notable because it appears to meet WP:GNG in that there is "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". I will note here that as per WP:ARTN, notability is measured with respect to the subject, not the article. It appears the subject meets WP:GNG because of the following coverage which is either extensive in the body content or is about the subject matter:
  1. Article in peer-reviewed Water Resources MAnagement
  2. Article in peer-reviewed Agricultural Water Management
  3. Article in peer-reviewed Irrigation and Drainage
  4. The Irrigation Sector (Book)
  5. Water Productivity in Agriculture: Limits and Opportunities for Improvement (Book)
  6. Tanks in Eastern India: A Study in Exploration (Book)
  7. Irrigation and Drainage Engineering (Book)
Posted unsigned by Deccantrap
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.