Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Climate and trade nexus in Africa

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 Draftify‎. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Climate and trade nexus in Africa

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

WP:NOTESSAY and possible WP:OR. Web search shows the existence of trade–climate nexus or trade and climate change nexus, but we don't have such articles. I don't think we need such a narrow topic. Also multiple orange tags. Brandmeister^talk 07:46, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Economics, Environment, and Africa. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:17, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is a bit tricky because the term is absolutely in use in the academic literature. The page is badly written to the extent that it looks like WP:OR. Suggest maybe it should be draftified or WP:TNT JMWt (talk) 09:31, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify as likely to be a notable topic but really just a half-finished essay for the moment. Mccapra (talk) 11:22, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I've seen and fixed worse, and if nothing else the sources that are already there are a good start and will be very helpful when an eventual rewrite comes along. A poorly written article is still easier to fix than a non-existent one. To put it short and good: I don't think it's quite so bad as to be worthy of TNT. --Licks-rocks (talk) 09:43, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There does seem to be enough discussion of this in reliable secondary sources to indicate notability. There are certainly concerns about WP:NOTESSAY and possibly WP:OR but I agree with Licks-rocks that there is enough there for an editor to work with. WJ94 (talk) 10:19, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 14:59, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify This is a notable topic, however it appears to be half-finished, essay-like, and in need of a re-write. I don't think it should stay in mainspace in the state that it is in. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 00:09, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep on basis of points put forward by Licks-rocks and WJ94 Jack4576 (talk) 14:40, 11 May 2023 (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.