Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Balgzand Gas 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 delete‎. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:19, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Balgzand Gas Plant (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I couldn't find sources to show this meets WP:N. Boleyn (talk) 16:50, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Environment, Geography, and Netherlands. Skynxnex (talk) 17:08, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:COATRACK, Extremely little of the content is actually about the gas plant. As this article is a huge failure even before examining notability, the delete is without prejudice on the topic. gidonb (talk) 00:37, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I'm surprised there were not more sources for this, even the gas fields have more sources than this. I will cite lack of Reliable sources, Lack of Secondary sources. And add, that it's just an industrial facility. We probably don't want to have articles on every factory that exists.James.folsom (talk) 23:39, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Per nom. Questionable notability with no secondary sources with SIGCOV. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 10:59, 25 February 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.