Talk:Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class because it uses a sub-category of [[Category:Environment]] on the article page.

If you agree with this assessment, please remove this message.
If you disagree with this assessment, please:

Change the above "class=stub" to "class=start" or another applicable class per Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment/Assessment#Quality scale;
Remove the stub template from the article.

Why is this important?

I mean, nothing has been said in this article about the organization since the creation (of this article) in 2004. No conclusions, no major missives; nothing. Why is it here? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:19, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its been a happy little stub doing no harm. It can be expanded. I contest its speedy-ness William M. Connolley (talk) 22:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would do no harm if the links to it from "live" articles were removed. Still, it's been sitting there, doing nothing, for 4 years, and today, on this talk page, we've said more than had been said over that 4 years. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 22:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly we have. What does that prove? It would have been nice if you'd started off with "I think this is a CSD, anyone object" and given it a day or two, though. As to removing the links, it does little harm or good. Anyway, I'm objecting now, so presumably I get a little while to try to un-speedy it William M. Connolley (talk) 22:27, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I frequently have introduced links to articles (especially to stub articles and orphaned articles) in order to attract more people to improve and expand them. With incoming links removed, such an article may "languish" for an indefinite length of time into the future. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that. What I can't see is relevance of the incoming links, other than from the parent organization, the SCOPE disambiguation page, and as author or publisher of references. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 22:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated it, I didn't delete it. If I was sure it was a CSD candidate, I would have deleted it. I'm an admin, remember? Still, I apologize for not notifying WMC, as the nearest thing to a substantive editor the article has ever had. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 22:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sorry, you're right, you didn't delete it. Fair enough William M. Connolley (talk) 22:51, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted it as it was tagged and fulfilled WP:CSD. It still doesn't assert notability, though it seems like it could. —EncMstr (talk) 22:59, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]