Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trends in library usage

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 History of libraries. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trends in library usage

[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)

This is not really an article about a notable subject but rather an informational essay about a broad topic. See WP:NOTESSAY. If the information on the page can be salvaged into an actual article then I think this page should be moved to draftspace. Di (they-them) (talk) 23:06, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Literature, and United States of America. Di (they-them) (talk) 23:06, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Seems to be something here, broadly mentions the US and Canada, but that's not a worldwide view... Sourcing isn't trivial either, but this isn't the version of the article we need. Oaktree b (talk) 23:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries, Education, and Social science. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:03, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to History of libraries as an alternative to deletion. Left guide (talk) 04:22, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There has to be something to talk about regarding the topic of "trends in library usage", but the article as it stands only discusses it from a North American perspective and is very essay-esque and broad as nom suggested. I lean towards either deleting it and starting over per WP:TNT or heavily condensing it and merging it with another article, possibly history of libraries like Left guide suggested. I think I lean more in favor of condensing and then merging the article. Waddles 🗩 🖉 04:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WaddlesJP13: Yeah, that was more or less my idea too, a very selective merge. I presume there's good sourcing, but some of the prose will certainly need re-writing when such a merge happens so as not to degrade the quality of the target article. Left guide (talk) 05:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete under WP:TNT. Another article in horrible unencylopedic shape. The project is better off just deleting this. Esolo5002 (talk) 00:52, 9 December 2024 (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.