Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Děčín Weir

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 no consensus‎. Courcelles (talk) 14:54, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Děčín Weir[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Per WP:FUTURE. All sources used are outdated, 12+ years old. The construction of the project is very uncertain, possible completion is far away. Imho at this stage it is very early for the structure to have its own page. FromCzech (talk) 12:10, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment, Transportation, and Czech Republic. FromCzech (talk) 12:10, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Wikipedia does not restrict itself purely to sources within the last 12 years. And neither is this article about WP:CRYSTAL or WP:RUMOUR but about an ongoing project on a major European river. And if you bothered to look at the German article you'd see there are many more links, the latest dated 2020. The international controversy over the project - which has grown since the article was written - rolls on and on and is sufficient to make it easily notable. What it needs is updating and expanding, not scrapping. Bermicourt (talk) 13:15, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's the problem – the project is not ongoing. The only step was the development of an EIA study, which is now invalid and a new EIA study must be prepared. The project does not have clear funding and it is possible that there will be no money for it. There is no timetable for when construction should begin or be completed. I didn't find any sources from 2020 on dewiki, I only see a presentation from 2016 that cites sources 12+ years old. As for the international controversy, half of it is unsourced and the other half contains old opinions that may not reflect the current opinions. FromCzech (talk) 13:30, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:52, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The German Wiki article states that "At the end of 2019, the Czech Ministry of the Environment (Czech: Ministerstvo životního prostředí) informed the German Directorate-General for Waterways and Shipping that the environmental impact assessment procedure had ended.[9]" Meanwhile there are up to date articles on the project that also suggest it's still ongoing, but its future is in doubt e.g. under the headline "CONTROVERSIAL DECIN WEIR: WILL THE MILLION PROJECT FINALLY FAIL DUE TO PROTECTED FLOWERS?" the German news agency tag24 said only last October (2022) that "for years, the Czech Republic has been planning the construction of the Decin barrage, which is supposed to improve the navigability of the Elbe and guarantee a depth of 1.40 m on 345 days/year...[but] the construction of the barrage is a long way off. Missed deadlines and the lack of an approved environmental impact assessment delayed the start of construction. Now the 200 million euro project is even further away. Wild flowers could cause a further delay... "We have already selected locations for it," RVC boss Lubomir Fojtu told Czech media. Problem: The Ministry of the Environment must be shown that the intended flowers and other protected plants are viable in the selected locations. Fojtu estimates it could take 5 years to prove that..."

So this major project is still being pursued by Czechia, but environmental concerns look likely to delay or cancel it. That would be a major embarrassment and make it even more notable than it already is. Bermicourt (talk) 14:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:52, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 04:08, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The references being 12 years old is of no import. The article needs updating, on whether it is defunct or ongoing, but many article are in need of updating. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 17:44, 5 May 2023 (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.