This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Alan Liefting (talk | contribs) at 21:51, 31 March 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 21:51, 31 March 2012 by Alan Liefting (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)List of alumina refineries
- List of alumina refineries (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- Delete per WP:NOT. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 17:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:39, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
- Keep No comprehensible nomination.
- Alumina refineries are significant pieces of engineering. They will (as does any construction of such scale) be fairly easy to demonstrate notability for. Each one also consumes considerable electrical power, has large quantities of raw materials shipped to it, and has a risk of environmental damage from their effluents. The locations of such plants are entirely proper topics for encyclopedic coverage. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:58, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
- The policy at WP:NOT should be a comprehensible reason enough reason for deletion in both specifics and in "spirit". I am not denying that alumina plants are significant although how significant is the question. It is interesting to note that none of the refineries have their own article. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:51, 31 March 2012 (UTC)