Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mediterranean Region

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus. Woohookitty 06:18, 16 July 2005 (UTC) 8 keep, 4 delete, 1 rename, 1 merge and redirect. No consensus.

[edit] Mediterranean Region

WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not a soapbox.-- BMIComp (talk) 7 July 2005 06:29 (UTC)

  • Delete. Yes, there should be an article about the region -- in fact, I wouldn't be surprised to find that we do have such an article -- but this reads like someone's high-school essay. It would probably be best to delete this and start over. --Carnildo 7 July 2005 06:38 (UTC)
  • Keep - A google search for "Mediterranean Region" (470,000 hits) shows that it is a phrase used by others (although often it is about Meditteranean Turkey and not the whole region, etc). However, this does not mean that this article should not be changed a lot and a lot more after that to make it encyclopedic. gren 7 July 2005 06:44 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to Mediterranean Sea Zeimusu | (Talk page) July 7, 2005 07:36 (UTC)
  • Edit The principle behind this is correct and it is definitely not the same as Mediterranean Sea, which is a geography article primarily about the sea itself. There is a distinct socio-economic context here that is as valid as Northern Europe or Sub-Saharan Africa. Unfortunately the article needs a rather heavy rewrite to get it off its soap-box and make it NPOV. But then, lots of Wiki articles started that way. --Red King 7 July 2005 14:30 (UTC)
  • Delete: Well, duh, there's going to be a high google. But this article...no. Let it be restarted. —ArmadniGeneral 7 July 2005 17:01 (UTC)
  • Delete. I was considering whether or not this should be edited and NPOV'd, but it seems like it would be better off starting from scratch. Jaxl 7 July 2005 19:08 (UTC)
  • Rename to Mediterranean region and cleanup. Appropriate subject for an article, godawful writing. Dcarrano July 7, 2005 21:09 (UTC)
  • Keep - It is a real region, and is not about geography like Mediterranean Sea, or about distant history, like History of the Mediterranean region. It's not a stub, or as wildly POV as suggested above. It could be improved, but that should go without saying for almost any vfd article that is kept. --rob 7 July 2005 21:29 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Mediterranean Sea. Mishmash of unrelated issues. Martg76 7 July 2005 22:22 (UTC)
  • Vote on content: Delete. humblefool®Have you voted in the CSD poll yet? 8 July 2005 05:21 (UTC)
  • Keep. The content of the article is different from other Wikipedia articles, and well yes, it deals with problems in the Mediterranean region. These are based on facts. --Maltesedog 8 July 2005 06:38 (UTC)
  • Keep, cleanup, and move to correctly capitalized Mediterranean region. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 8 July 2005 06:08 (UTC)
    • Keep, and do what Angr says. --ROY YOЯ 15:55, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep agree with User:Angr. Also, see the first heading of the Editing policy; although the article is not exactly the pinnacle of NPOV, there is potential there. You (Talk) July 8, 2005 17:13 (UTC)
    • Comment. The problem with the article is not just POV-related, but also shaky English, and total failure to outline: It's not at all clear from this article what the Mediterranean region countries are, why they might have certain things in common or issues with each other, and why the article is concentrating on certain issues rather than seemingly much larger ones. Of course, these are editing things rather than VfD things. Dcarrano July 8, 2005 17:30 (UTC)
      • Exactly. The article has the potential to be encylopedic, and should be kept since there is at least a shred of potential there. You (Talk) July 8, 2005 17:40 (UTC)
  • you could rename it 'everything I can think of which is wrong with the mediterranean and probably everywhere else'. It contains just about nothing you might expect to be in an article under its present name. You might extract sentences from it and stick them into other geographical articles for different countries, but people interested in those articles might object. I dont like deleting things, but where exactly does this stuff belong without a lot of work?Sandpiper 22:55, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep per Angr, although a horribly low quality article. KissL 08:24, 12 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.