Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Protective Action Guide for Nuclear Incidents

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 delete. Stifle (talk) 19:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Protective Action Guide for Nuclear Incidents

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

Contested PROD. Concern was: Reads like a manual or essay, unsourced OR, doesn't seem possible to re-write neutrally Eeekster (talk) 02:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This seems to be an attempt to present a specific HOW-TO manual as an article in its own right. If the manual itself were contentious and the subject of heated debate in the press, etc, this could be possible, but since Wikipedia is not itself a HOW-TO manual it seems inappropriate. An "External Link" entry in one of the nuclear radiation articles (say, the first blue link in the article) might be suitable. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:27, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:49, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as prodder. The article reads like a how-to guide and I don't see it being reparable. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 19:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A summary based on important documents, not how to do it, which would be much more detailed. This sort of information is of public interest and is reasonable encyclopedic content. The necessary rewriting is perfect feasible. I started by changing the title of the article to Protective action for nuclear incidents, which avoids the impression of being a how to. I also removed the confusing section summarizing earlier accidents; the articles on them should simply be linked. DGG ( talk ) 02:26, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DGG, let's assume you are right, an article on Protective action for nuclear incidents is necessary. That would be about the general principles of what to do in such an event. But we had here a different article, about a specific document, where we had a HOW-TO if not an ADV problem. It's changing from MyShop, Notown to a whole new piece on Notown: you're still deleting MyShop, but muddying the waters at the same time. If the article on the new topic is indeed needed then let's create it from scratch, not from this messy mistaken HOW-TO guide. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:56, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge a summary version into Radioactive contamination under a new "Protective measures" section per WP:PRESERVE. Content is verifiable and the provided references would make a good starting point for people interested, until we have a real article about "Protective action for nuclear incidents". Diego (talk) 13:25, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Whatever else this may be, it's not an encyclopedia article. The mere fact that some of its content might be useful in writing actual articles doesn't make it salvageable. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 02:30, 11 March 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.