Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global warming in Japan

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. No consensus to delete. The issue of renaming can continue on the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:58, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Global warming in Japan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

We have global warming. Why do we need "...in Japan"? There is nothing particularly special about Japan. If we have this, we'll have 200-odd in-this-country pages. William M. Connolley (talk) 19:56, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Environmental_issues_in_Japan, cutting out the non-specific parts. Gigs (talk) 20:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I know it's WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but see Category:Climate change by country. -Atmoz (talk) 20:52, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They are next on the list if this works :-). Is there a WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST? Where is "climate change in Brunei? etc etc William M. Connolley (talk) 21:04, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With the new political leadership in Japan, global warming has become a highly discussed topic in the Japanese media. The new government wants to impose a dramatic requirement for a reduction of "greenhouse" gasses, and Japanese industry is protesting the burden that will place on them. Also, if global warming really is true, as an island nation Japan would be seriously threatened by rising sea levels. I think an argument could be made to have a separate article on the issue, as long as it's more than three or four paragraphs long and well-cited. Cla68 (talk) 21:28, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep as there are good references used in the article, and it could likely be expanded. Lack of similar articles for any/every other country out there doesn't preclude having one for Japan if there are sources to back it up. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:45, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. —···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:46, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I'd !vote keep if there were any sources evident that addressed global warming specifically with respect to Japan, instead of global warming in general as they currently do. In this case, I have no compunction asking those who want to keep it to do the research and demonstrate notability. —Quasirandom (talk) 22:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As per User:William M. Connolley. This is a global issue. I don't see how this affects Japan more or less than any other country. This should just be a re-direct page to Environmental_issues_in_Japan.--Baina90 (talk) 22:45, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Practically everything I've ever read about AGW indicates that impacts "will probably be distributed unevenly". Some parts of the globe may become wetter, drier, or may experience changes in the intensity of precipitation...". Therefore, while the global warming article gives good information about the overall issue, the Japan article is of value because it provides more detailed information specific to that country. Of course, it needs to be expanded, but so do a lot of wikipedia articles. Overall, I think all the Climate Change by country articles are valuable. Some people want to know what's happening in their own country mitigation wise, or how climate change might effect them personally.--CurtisSwain (talk) 00:46, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - well-referenced article, and as CurtisSwain notes, the article does indeed have great value. ···巌流^{? · talk to ganryuu} 00:57, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources to use for expanding the article: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]. I don't have time to expand it right now, but might in a couple of days if the article is still (hopefully) around. Also, just a suggestion to WMC, before nominating these kinds of articles for deletion, I suggest leaving a note on the discussion page at the different nation's wikiprojects to allow the project participants to try to fix any hard issues with the articles first. Cla68 (talk) 01:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Global warming is global. That's why we call it "global" warming. If this will be kept, it should at least be renamed to "Climate change in Japan" or something that actually makes sense. Gigs (talk) 01:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, there are some notable scientists who believe that warming is local, not global. The use of the word "global" is controversial, and may be one of the reasons why "climate change" is becoming the preferred title for the topic. If this article is changed to "Climate change in Japan", then all of the articles with "global warming" in the name may need to be retitled also. Cla68 (talk) 01:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd support Climate change in Japan as an alternate title for this article. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 02:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Good point. the name is somewhat oxymoronic. you cant have global warming in japan, as its global, only effects in japan from global warming.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:32, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep given Cla68's references (and not based on what's currently in the article). No strong opinion on the proposed name change, but it sounds reasonable. —Quasirandom (talk) 19:50, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and retitle if needed, but the issue of the effects, politics, etc. of global warming in Japan is a valid sub-article topic per WP:SS. Similarly, we have both Abortion and Abortion in Japan, etc. Sandstein 19:17, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, though we should probably leave the general material at Regional effects of global warming and focus this article on the climate change mitigation strategies adopted by the government and the society. - 2/0 (cont.) 23:34, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.