Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GK Wien-Southeast

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP (no consensus). Andrewa 16:57, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

GK Wien-Southeast

An, um, electrical installation.

This and several other pages of this kind (Baltic-Cable, Kontek, Konti-Skan, Elbe-Project, HVDC Gotland, HVDC Wolgograd-Donbass, HVDC Cross-Channel, HVDC Inter-Island, HVDC Italia-Corsica-Sardinia, HVDC Vancouver-Island, Pacific-Intertie, Nelson River Bipole, HVDC Kingsnorth, Cross-Skagerak, Cabora-Bassa, Inga-Shaba) are all linked at high-voltage direct current, and most of them need to be wikified.

Are they really sufficiently notable to have their own pages? Abstain for now. Martg76 14:37, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Delete. Non-encyclopedic. Martg76 03:21, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Keep these articles seem to be bad machine translations from German, but the subject matter seems verifiable. - SimonP 16:33, Jan 3, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Geekily notable. --LeeHunter 16:57, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• No problem with topic, but it's not normally acceptable to paste machine translations of foreign language Wikipedia articles into the English-language Wikipedia and leave them in that state. See Wikipedia:Translation into English: "Never use machine translation to create an article!" and Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English: "If the article is a mere copy of (all or part of) an article in a foreign-language Wikipedia, it can just get added to Wikipedia:Candidates for speedy deletion: we want to discourage people who cut articles from one Wikipedia and paste to another without translating." Combining two sins doesn't seem to me to lessen the offense. Weak delete on all of these that are machine-translated from the German Wikipedia, but I'd be willing to accept a commitment to clean these up within a reasonable amount of time... -- Jmabel | Talk 07:46, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete I can't imagine why these things are encyclopedia-worthy, translation or not. RickK 22:16, Jan 4, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Read it, and one might be somewhat interested in the topic (HVDC coupling? Oh my :), but not in this individual, uhm, installation. Wyss 03:42, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Keep I've been working at cleaning up these articles. I think they are at least as encyclopedia-worthy as many other topics - Wikipedia is not paper. I would argue that given current interest in electric power disruptions and transportation of large quantities of renewable energy, that these articles are worth keeping. We can't keep the computers on with out electricity - and HVDC is *all about* electricity in gigawatt quantities. --Wtshymanski 23:38, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep We have articles on individual railroad lines, individual streets in some cities, and individual fictional characters in sci-fi series, and we can afford articles about individual major electrical power transmission projects. Unlike a paper encyclopedia, there's no physical limit on how many articles our encyclpedia grows, as long as there's disk space and the willingness of folks to write and maintain the articles. Atlant 20:31, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.