Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Preservation of banknotes

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 as a how-to guide, no verified information to merge. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Preservation of banknotes

Wikipedia is not a how-to manual. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 05:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per nom, although without prejudice to an encyclopaedic article being written later. David Mestel^(Talk) 07:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP - the article author has clearly marked the article as under construction (with the {{underconstruction}} template), and the last edit to this article is only 6 days prior to this nomination. - NDCompuGeek 08:56, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- And? The fact that it's new doesn't mean that it is encyclopedic or will be. --Nlu (talk) 09:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete inappropriate content. /Blaxthos 09:53, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOT. I agree with User:David.Mestel in saying that if an encyclopedic article on the subject can be written then there is no problem with that, but this is just a how-to. Also agree with the nominator, {{underconstruction}} is not a valid reason to keep an article, particularly when what's being constructed is unencyclopedic. Arkyan 15:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Media preservation, making sure that everything is attributed to a reliable source. I don't think we need a how-to manual here, but document preservation is a reasonable topic for coverage. Historical societies, for example, spend a considerable amount of time preserving documents. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 16:50, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless article changes to reflect culture of money preservation or other encyclopedic content, then move to a more appropriate title.

How to type pages are clearly discussed under WP:NOT i kan reed 17:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - The article is dealing with a conservation related subject, and probably needs a stub tag (and category) in that direction. At present is does not comply with style requirements, and is thus a weak article, but so are many stubs. Conservation techniques are clearly encyclopaedic, though this article is not one yet. Peterkingiron 23:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as Elkman suggested to make a stronger article. But if as a result of addition of further material it becomes too much to merge, just keep and clean up to make it a third-person encyclopedia article. Either way, the how-to aspects would make a great contribution to Wikibooks, and placing links in appropriate Wikipedia articles would help readers find it. Fg2 00:52, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, empty. Article about technologies and techniques used to conserve paper documents would be important and useful. (They are very diverse and very interesting.) Pavel Vozenilek 23:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Merge into Banknote#Paper money collecting as a hobby ~~Media preservation as a separate section~~. The topic of "banknote preservation" is an encyclopedic one that should receive mention somewhere. Other editors can later incorporate it into the main body of the article. -- Black Falcon 21:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Given that the information is unsourced and the prose is not the best (in fact, my rewrite of the first paragraph may have made it worse), deletion is seems an attractive option. -- Black Falcon 00:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The existing information is minimal (and unsourced) and should be (merged, if you wish) in a "Preservation" section of the relevant banknote article unless it becomes evident that it is large or notable enough to require a separate article. Note that similar info on stamps is in a section of Stamp collecting (itself summarized in Stamps), with one of the tools described there being notable enough to have a small article of its own (stamp hinge), as opposed to a separate Preservation of stamps article. Media preservation is not a good merge target, as banknotes are not primarily information-carrying "media" so much as artifacts of value in themselves. Media preservation would get unwieldy if it had sections on preserving instances of this sort (such as stamps, comic books, for instance) - the article is concerned with preserving the information, which may entail copying, or transcribing from one medium to another, something usually frowned on by the issuers of banknotes! - David Oberst 22:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- But, ... I just admire the quality of their work ... and imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, .... right? . . . . . . . . . I have adjusted my comment in light of your excellent argument. -- Black Falcon 00:24, 20 March 2007 (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.