Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Poverty in Tanzania

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 keep. (non-admin closure) →TSU ^tp* 07:11, 22 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Poverty in Tanzania

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

Simple case of essay / original research. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:41, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rescue or nuke it to a stub and start over 100% essay, ZERO citations. The "references" given are not cited anywhere in the article. The essay writer even uses first person wording e.g "I would like to focus more on the....." . North8000 (talk) 12:24, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
One of the references is a Wikipedia article. North8000 (talk) 01:59, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep We have an article Poverty in the United States and there no shortage of sources discussing poverty in Tanzania too: Crisis, urbanization, and urban poverty in Tanzania; Tanzania's Growth Process and Success in Reducing Poverty; Contextualising Poverty in Tanzania; &c. If the current draft needs works then this is best addressed by ordinary editing per our editing policy. Warden (talk) 18:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
True, but for an article that is 100% essay with zero citations, the place to start would be to delete the whole article except for the references. Maybe nuke it to a stub? North8000 (talk) 21:41, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:29, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:29, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:15, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Probably an encyclopedic topic. There are editing concerns, to be sure, but they are editing concerns. Carrite (talk) 02:57, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. While an encyclopedic article about poverty in Tanzania can be written, this article isn't it. The current article is an essay that combines original research with WP:SOAPBOX. It bears a striking resemblance to the essay by the same author deleted 3 days ago at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laxity is the Cause of Poverty in Tanzania. Starting over from a stub may be the best solution here. • Gene93k (talk) 03:23, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep We can always edit it. Pug6666 (talk) 19:20, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This should not be at AfD. WP:RFC and adding to the Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron/Rescue list are the way to improve articles. Thank you Warden for adding this article to the WP:ARS list. I also second Carrite's opinion; editing the article itself, or asking for help on the talk page is the place to start. Anarchangel (talk) 05:53, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is possible for an article to be so poorly written that it needs to be deleted and started over; I do not think this is in quite so bad a condition. Much of the material seems usable, if it were better sourced, and seems reasonable enough that sourcing should be possible--there are some in the article to start with. We should encourage writers to start articles, even if they do not quite understand at first how to do it in a fully adequate way. Article improve as people fix them; WP artiucles are inherently works in progress, not finished works. . DGG ( talk ) 08:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Normal editing practices can handle any problems. See Category:Poverty by country for other such articles, for an example of how they should be done. Dream Focus 13:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. RS here and there.— Racconish^Tk 19:59, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per DreamFocus, DGG, and WP:BEFORE. AfD is not for cleanup. It is one of a series of linked articles on poverty. Racconish found some possible sources. Also, it has been improved from the essay per WP:HEY. Bearian (talk) 23:13, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The notability of the subject is not in question. Reliable / verifiable sources I'm sure are plentiful. If the problem is editing style, I am sure those can be fixed with normal editing practices. Besides, the article is not long enough, and with a little commitment from interested editors, the problem can be fixed within a day or two.Tamsier (talk) 16:49, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Some other sources: [1], [2], [3], [4].— Racconish^Tk 19:29, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The issue is not about sources. There are several reliable sources. The issue is editing style. I've attempted to make some edits but this is not my speciality. Help with re-editing the article would be more fruitful.Tamsier (talk) 23:10, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. AfD is about sources, not style. — Racconish^Tk 04:44, 22 June 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.