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. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A notable topic for which sufficient information is available. I see no potential for a POV on this article. The Environmental issues with paper] is a more likely candidate for a POV if "issue" is considered in a negative context. It is not a content fork since there is space for both articles. If anything the Environmental issues with paper article should be merged into this one (with a redir) rather than having it deleted. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 01:03, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But this article is entirely about the environmental issues of paper, much of which has nothing to do with printing. And hell, it's got a list of facts, all of which just seem to be something you'd basically find on a flier encourages you to recycle and cut down on paper use.--Yaksar(let's chat) 01:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In fact holy crap, I just re-read the entire article and there's basically nothing in it at all about printing and the environment. It's all about, well, environmental issues with paper.--Yaksar(let's chat) 01:18, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Alan's many "xxxx and the environment" articles have created a lot of unnecessary confusion and duplication, and I'm pleased that some have already been deleted. Johnfos (talk) 01:34, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with article on printing (make it its own section). There's some good info here, but not enough to constitute a separate article. --The Wing Dude, Musical Extraordinaire (talk) 22:56, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - This overlaps with other articles. There is no sourced content to merge. -- Whpq (talk) 16:01, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. & others. Content overlap & duplication galore.--JayJasper (talk) 18:24, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
merge with Environmental issues with paper--at this point there is no other content.. Possibly retitle that article to indicate a broader focus. DGG ( talk ) 00:29, 26 February 2011 (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.