Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milorganite

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 Speedy keep (non-admin closure). Anupmehra -Let's talk! 04:20, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Milorganite

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

This article about processed sewage sludge is referenced to the extent that it can easliy be confirmed that the product exists. I see no evidence however that it is notable. References are from local papers and generic references about sewage sludge. This appears to be a local product, very similar to thousands of other similar products sold across the developed world. Therefore fails notability. Perhaps a merge into Sewage sludge might be the best course of action . Velella ^{Velella Talk} 13:58, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep No. It was the first and a precursor to the industry. Well referenced article. "History of Milorganite". Milorganite. Retrieved March 26, 2014. Since its inception in 1926 as the first pelletized fertilizer in the United States, Milorganite has sold over 9 billion pounds of recycled waste. "Milorganite Reaches 9 Billion Pounds with 85 Years of Recycling" (Press release). June 2, 2012. Retrieved March 26, 2014. In combining concerns for the environment and social justice, while successfully navigating the fluctuations and viscisitudes of the changing waste stream to deliver an important product through recycling, Milorganite has been at the forefront of the industry, even as it tries to reconcile the contradictions in its missions.Foote, Stephanie, Ed.; Mazzolini, Elizabeth; Schneider, Daniel (Chapter 7) (2012). "7, "Purification or Profit: Milwaukee and the Contradiction of Sludge". Histories of the Dustheap: Waste, Material Cultures, Social Justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. pp. 171–197. ISBN 0262017997. Retrieved March 26, 2014.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link) "The world’s first large scale wastewater treatment plant was constructed on Jones Island, near the shore of Lake Michigan." Stephens, Odin L.; Mengak, Michael T.; Osborn, David; Miller, Karl V. (March 2005). "Using Milorganite to temporarily repel white-tailed deer from food plots" (PDF). Wildlife Management Series. University of Georgia Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources. Retrieved April 1, 2014. It had the largest capacity of any plant in the world when constructed.Freese, Simon W., P.E.; Sizemore, Deborah Lightfoot. A Century in the Works: 100 Years of Progress in Civil and Environmental Engineering; Freese and Nichols Consulting Engineers 1894-1994 (PDF). p. 44. Retrieved April 2, 2014.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) It was the first treatment facility to economically dispose of the recovered sludge by producing an organic fertilizer." In the early 1980s the plant needed extensive reworking, "this does not detract from its historic significance as a pioneering facility in the field of pollution control technology."Merritt, Raymond H. (1982). Historical Report Photographs, Written Historical and Descriptive Data (PDF). National Park Service. Retrieved April 1, 2014. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help) The 1925 plant has been designated as a Historic Civil Engineering Landmark by the American Society of Civil Engineers."Environmental Draft Impact Statement: Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewage District; Water Pollution Abatement Program, No. E1S801072DB". Environmental Protection Agency. November 1980. p. V-100. Retrieved April 1, 2014. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:07, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:28, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:28, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP I am surprised that this discussion is even happening. The first of its kind? Since 1924? If nothing else, let the wikipedia public decide. The page information reveals that " Milorganite has been viewed 1828 times in the last 30 days. " This is averaging (do your own math) something like 50 hits a day, even ignoring a recent spike probably caused by the absurd attempt to delete the article. People are looking for, and (if we keep it) finding the info on wikipedia. Is not that why we are all here? Carptrash (talk) 17:09, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Well-sourced. What's the problem again? — goethean 20:17, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep! Absurd to be having this debate. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 07:24, 2 April 2014 (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.