Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coffee wastewater

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. Rlendog (talk) 22:07, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Coffee wastewater[edit]

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

This may or may not be an advertisement. If anything, it's more of an essay about the topic. I'm not entirely sure this can be improved, but it's been poked at for a few months. I'd rather bring this to discussion over a PROD, and it's not worthy of CSD. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 04:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The article seems to have enough published sources to believe it is an important topic of research/discussion. Obviously it needs clean-up, chopping out uncited chunks ...and I'm not happy with the use of an unpublished student thesis! Sionk (talk) 13:44, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:10, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I well referenced article and as mentioned it only needs some tweaking. Seems notable enough even though it is a minor topic in the great scheme of things. Pity we can't get editors to fill the gap on more important topics. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs)

Keep - This doesn't look like an essay to me, as I'm not seeing any opinion or conjecture. I'm seeing facts and figures from sources. It looks like a technical article about a really strange topic. This passes GNG, and is an easy keep. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:54, 23 February 2012 (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.