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. Nomination withdrawal in light of new sources and comments in the discussion. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades ^Godric 12:29, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

International Plant Nutrition Colloquium (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Dearth of secondary sources.Prob. only important to a very specific field?? Winged Blades ^Godric 13:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• The sources are not secondary. All sources are either the websites of the colloquium itself, or they are the proceedings of the colloquium published in international peer-reviewed scientific journals. It is necessary to reference scientific journal proceedings from the early conferences, as the IPNC did not have websites in the 1950s (for obvious reasons). As stated in the text, the colloquium is attended by over 800 international researchers and is the most important conference in the field of plant nutrition. Roger.mcdonald (talk) 00:28, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Roger.mcdonald:--Well dearth means "an absence of".Winged Blades ^Godric 14:13, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• I have added secondary sources, including a book written about the IPNC which is for sale at Amazon Roger.mcdonald (talk) 21:48, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - I'm not real familiar with this area but the Colloquium papers are formally published and seem to be cited regularly by others. In that sense, it seems to function as a notable scientific journal.Glendoremus (talk) 05:37, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:56, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:56, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. It is a well-known meeting with publications. The papers are peer-reviewed. The International Plant Nutrition Council which organizes the meetings is an elected body of senior scientists in the field. StarryGrandma (talk) 02:48, 7 March 2017 (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.