Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kouhrang Dam

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 05:52, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kouhrang Dam[edit]

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

Small dam which does not meet WP:GNG. Has been tagged for notability since April 2010; however, no improvements were made for establishing notability. No English search results, except different wikies based on this page. There may be more deep coverage in Farsi. Beagel (talk) 17:35, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 21:54, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 21:54, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As a hydroelectric generation plant and dam, notability can be assumed; and sources are very likely to be found in Farsi. Systemic bias may be an issue. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:14, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not every hydroplant and dam is notable, particularly in the case of micro- and small hydro projects. You can't just asume a notability of every micro- and small scale project. If there are sources satisfying WP:GNG, the article should be kept. Otherwise, it should be deleted. During almost four years nobody has provided any reliable third party source providing a significant coverage addressing the topic directly and in detail. Just mentioning the name of the dam by sources is not enough for WP:GNG. As for Systemic bias, it may be an issue, of course, but unlikely. During the last four years, members of WP:DAMS, particularly user:NortyNort has expanded all similar stubs created by the same author. Remained only stubs where no sources available. There is also no article in Farsi. Beagel (talk) 06:07, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Very small dam which does not meet WP:GNG. Given the growth trend for renewable energy plants, notability cannot be simply assumed, or else things would quickly get out of hand. Johnfos (talk) 03:34, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Seems fairly notable; part of a larger water project, >50m in height at least (need to do more research), and has a sizable power plant. I added some references but don't have the time now to do more work on the article. Seems some English references recently became available for this one. I will expand this one more shortly.--NortyNort (Holla) 14:27, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so this HPP is Kouhrang 2 and is part of a large water transfers project. I thought it was Kouhrang 3 which is a large arch dam to be constructed downstream at a later date.--NortyNort (Holla) 21:55, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:19, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn my nomination. The article has significantly improved and its notability is established by sources. Beagel (talk) 05:41, 28 January 2014 (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.