Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Schedule 1 substances (CWC)

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. Sjakkalle 06:48, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of Schedule 1 substances (CWC)

This looks like some government instruction sheet copied from somewhere. In fact the first paragraph gets 53 google hits [1]. Anyway, I don't think this is an encyclopedia article. Is this something for Wikisource? Sjakkalle 12:17, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Note from author: The source is the OPCW. This page is meant to replace and expand material currently on Chemical Weapons Convention, though I agree that the introduction needs some work doing on it. The format and placement of the list on Wikipedia allow links through to the articles on individual chemicals, and a check-tool for editors writing new chemicals articles. Hope you'll keep it ;) Physchim62 13:14, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. ✏ OvenFresh 2 15:54, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. However, let's make sure that good Wikipedia practices are followed. Physchim62, it looks like you've been doing a lot of contributing to Wikipedia, so thank you for that. Please make sure that you are within fair use requirements and are not directly quoting your source material, and that you are not duplicating material already found elsewhere on Wikipedia. I am all for keeping this article, it seems to have valid information. EvilPhoenix
Keep, since it's on a .gov website [2] its not copyrighted. Should really explain where it comes from though. Kappa 17:19, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Longhair | Talk 18:51, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Samaritan 19:40, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, cleanup and expand. useful. Megan1967 03:51, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep similar to List of Poison Pokemon Klonimus 05:44, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This seems inconsistent with a keep vote, as List of Poison Pokemon is a redlink. A Man In Black 07:23, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Note from original author: I have to agree! However, I still think that this page is a useful expansion of the Chemical Weapons Convention article. The intro is now slightly improved, and I welcome other comments either here or on the article's talk page. Physchim62 16:48, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is a useful page, particularly in these days of terrorism. I can imagine this page getting a lot of hits if there is a major chemical weapons attack. Walkerma 23:59, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. →Iñgōlemo← ^talk 03:28, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
Keep. Wikipedia has expanded past half a million articles covering practically all aspects of almost everything. With such a number of articles and many new ones introduced every day, the article topics are now getting more detailed. Considering the detailed nature of many of the articles in the half a million we have, I think it is consistent for Wikipedia to keep this internationally applicable and relevant list, although I concede it is not relevant to most people. Also, the list is not so exceptionally long that it poses a burden for Wikipedia to keep. As for the fact that it does not seem like an encyclopedia article, perhaps the explanation should be expanded so it is like one. H Padleckas 04:21, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
As the nominator I'm shutting this down now, I see that I'm clearly in the minority on this one. Sjakkalle 06:48, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.