Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eaton Electric Generating Plant

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 merge‎ to Mississippi Power. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:49, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eaton Electric Generating Plant

[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)

Tagged for notability since 2010. First source is a listing, second source is dead, this source lacks WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:28, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Technology, United States of America, and Mississippi. UtherSRG (talk) 17:28, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable (and long gone) structure; I'm not showing that it was a registered historic site. No sourcing found for the plant. Oaktree b (talk) 18:43, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Petal, Mississippi. There are newspaper articles on the subject and it seems to have been a regionally important structure. However, it does not meet WP:GNG.--User:Namiba 19:28, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm traveling and don't have time to look for refs for now. However, from reading the article, it sounds historically significant and probably notable. If you redirect instead of keeping, I strongly recommend redirecting to Mississippi Power, not Petal, Mississippi. It's more significant in the power industry's history than Petal's.

-- A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 20:04, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merger with Mississippi Power does sound reasonable since this is the parent company which built and operated this plant, and was named after Barney Eaton, Mississippi Power's first president. However, small portion of content of Eaton Electric Generating Plant would need to be rewritten since it is accidentally misrepresenting the sources. For example, WDAM source says that plant was "closed in 2012 because it had become less efficient than other plants" while article cites "declining efficiency". The original statement compares the efficiency to that of other plants, while the latter compares the efficiencies of the same plant across time. It is likely, the Eaton plant maintained the same efficiency while the other plants advanced due to incremental upgrades or entirely new designs. Anton.bersh (talk) 07:42, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Different Merge/Redirect targets are brought up here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:41, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:18, 3 August 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.