- 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 22:20, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Sui gas field ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Stumbled on this article as needing clean-up. Discovered that nearly the entire article had been copy pasted from an external site. Relevance of said text was also unclear. Upon further review I'm not sure this article meets notability or significance. It might be the largest natural gas reserve in Pakistan, but that's about it. Nothing significant or notable about it in any other domain. Nearlyevil665 ( talk) 20:19, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Comment What page is it copied from? The Earwig cooyvio tool isn’t finding it. Mccapra ( talk) 20:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 20:36, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Pre-cleanup nearly the entirety of the Production section was copied from here. Nearlyevil665 ( talk) 20:51, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. Although the article is in bad shape, the subject itself notable enough to satisfy WP:GNG. Beagel ( talk) 18:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 03:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per the very first source found by clicking in the word "books" above, plus many others. And I don't understand what "other domain" the nominator is looking for. This is a gas field, not a cricketer or a film or anything else. Phil Bridger ( talk) 20:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. This gas field is recognized by petroleum geologists as a giant gas field having over 5 trillion cubic feet of proven gas reserves in Eocene carbonates. There are a number of papers about it that can be found by digging in the geologic literature, e.g. AAPG Bulletin. Paul H. ( talk) 03:34, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Additional Comment The current estimated reserves is not over 5 trillion cubic feet (a 1959 estimate). It is actually 10 to 11 trillion cubic feet. This makes it a monster of a supergiant gas field and quite economically significant and noteworthy beyond any doubt. Paul H. ( talk) 13:58, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 22:20, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Sui gas field ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Stumbled on this article as needing clean-up. Discovered that nearly the entire article had been copy pasted from an external site. Relevance of said text was also unclear. Upon further review I'm not sure this article meets notability or significance. It might be the largest natural gas reserve in Pakistan, but that's about it. Nothing significant or notable about it in any other domain. Nearlyevil665 ( talk) 20:19, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Comment What page is it copied from? The Earwig cooyvio tool isn’t finding it. Mccapra ( talk) 20:32, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 20:36, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Pre-cleanup nearly the entirety of the Production section was copied from here. Nearlyevil665 ( talk) 20:51, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. Although the article is in bad shape, the subject itself notable enough to satisfy WP:GNG. Beagel ( talk) 18:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 03:28, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per the very first source found by clicking in the word "books" above, plus many others. And I don't understand what "other domain" the nominator is looking for. This is a gas field, not a cricketer or a film or anything else. Phil Bridger ( talk) 20:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. This gas field is recognized by petroleum geologists as a giant gas field having over 5 trillion cubic feet of proven gas reserves in Eocene carbonates. There are a number of papers about it that can be found by digging in the geologic literature, e.g. AAPG Bulletin. Paul H. ( talk) 03:34, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Additional Comment The current estimated reserves is not over 5 trillion cubic feet (a 1959 estimate). It is actually 10 to 11 trillion cubic feet. This makes it a monster of a supergiant gas field and quite economically significant and noteworthy beyond any doubt. Paul H. ( talk) 13:58, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- 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.