| Revision as of 21:58, 25 January 2016 editDavey2010 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers142,512 edits Reopened← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 03:13, 31 January 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Added missing end tags to discussion close footer to reduce Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' | |||
| <!--Template:Afd top | |||
| Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> | |||
| The result was '''keep''' (]). ] (]) 00:44, 26 January 2016 (UTC) | |||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|P}} | |||
| :{{la|Ashburne Hall}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks"></span>) | :{{la|Ashburne Hall}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks"></span>) | ||
| Line 13: | Line 19: | ||
| :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the ]. ] (]) 13:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)</small> | :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the ]. ] (]) 13:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *'''Close comment''' - I originally closed as Keep but Redrose has been continuously badgering me to reopen this due to the fact I closed a tad early .... so |
*'''Close comment''' - I originally closed as Keep but Redrose has been continuously badgering me to reopen this due to the fact I closed a tad early .... so keep everyone happy I'm reopening, Completely pointless but there we go. –]<sup>]</sup> 21:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC) | ||
| {{clear}} | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div> | |||
Latest revision as of 03:13, 31 January 2022
- 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 (non-admin closure). Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:44, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Ashburne Hall
- Ashburne Hall (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)
Not notable on its own - All encyclopedia worthy information is included in the Fallowfield Campus article ツStacey (talk) 20:53, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep WP:GNG says "if a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article" - which part of that has not been met? --Redrose64 (talk) 22:20, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 01:23, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:GEOFEAT. Grade II-listed building and plenty of coverage. The Historic England listing gives very good reasons as to its historic and architectural significance. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep for reasons given by Redrose and Necrothesp.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 19:31, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- Close comment - I originally closed as Keep but Redrose has been continuously badgering me to reopen this due to the fact I closed a tad early .... so keep everyone happy I'm reopening, Completely pointless but there we go. –Davey2010 21:57, 25 January 2016 (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.