Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Nottingham Forest, Houston: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:32, 10 March 2009 editMmyers1976 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,296 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 16:08, 10 March 2009 edit undoMmyers1976 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,296 edits Nottingham Forest, HoustonNext edit →
Line 23: Line 23:
:See JohnCD's comment - the precedent seems pretty clear that even all of Nottingham Forest would not be notable enough to merit its own article. Perhaps "Memorial Area, Houston" would be encompassing enough to be notable.] (]) 14:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC) :See JohnCD's comment - the precedent seems pretty clear that even all of Nottingham Forest would not be notable enough to merit its own article. Perhaps "Memorial Area, Houston" would be encompassing enough to be notable.] (]) 14:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
*'''Keep/Rewrite''' This article could certainly be expanded to cover Nottingham Forest and such an article would be an asset to Misplaced Pages's coverage of ].<br />Mmyers1976{{mdash}} I suggest you read ]<br />Closing admin, note bias <br />--] (]) 15:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC) *'''Keep/Rewrite''' This article could certainly be expanded to cover Nottingham Forest and such an article would be an asset to Misplaced Pages's coverage of ].<br />Mmyers1976{{mdash}} I suggest you read ]<br />Closing admin, note bias <br />--] (]) 15:20, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
:I did not do anything to disrupt wikipedia, nor did I attempt to do so in order to prove a point. I suggest '''you''' read ]. ] (]) 15:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC) :I did not do anything to disrupt wikipedia, nor did I attempt to do so in order to prove a point. I suggest '''you''' read ]. Also, bringing up already deleted comments of mine from my own User Page which I have changed my mind about (hence the deletion) in an attempt to discredit me is poor form. I respectfully but firmly request that you edit your above comment to make it more neutral, stick to the issue at hand, and leave personalities out of it.] (]) 15:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:08, 10 March 2009

Nottingham Forest, Houston

Nottingham Forest, Houston (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Subject does not appear to be notable, as a subsection of an undistinguished suburban housing subdivision Mmyers1976 (talk) 15:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete. Non-notable neighborhood. Being on a list of most expensive neighborhoods in the city is not enough to establish notability. The article even frequently mentions "just like other neighborhoods in the area". Karanacs (talk) 15:27, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fritzpoll (talk) 09:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz 00:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Generally I lean towards agreement with you that this has more of a chance of being notable if the article is rewritten to include all of Nottingham Forest, but I wonder about your assumption that USGS noting the existence of the entire neighborhood making it notabile. Elementary schools are included on USGS topo maps, but we all know that elementary schools are not generally notable. Mmyers1976 (talk) 14:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
See JohnCD's comment - the precedent seems pretty clear that even all of Nottingham Forest would not be notable enough to merit its own article. Perhaps "Memorial Area, Houston" would be encompassing enough to be notable.Mmyers1976 (talk) 14:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Informative to whom? Other than the people living in Nottingham Forest, Section VIII, I can't see how it could be of any interest to anyone. Furthermore, read WP:GNG. In order for a subject to be notable, it has to have received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources "address the subject directly in detail and no original research is needed to extract the content." That is not the case for Nottingham Forest Section VIII - there is not a singlereference in the whole article which directly addresses Nottingham Forest Section VIII. Also, see precedent from WP:OUTCOMES#Places : "Smaller suburbs should generally be listed under the primary city article, except when they consist of legally separate municipalities or communes (e.g., having their own governments)." NF Sec. VIII is not a legally separate municipality. It isn't even its own municipal utility district. That is why this article is here at AfD. Mmyers1976 (talk) 14:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
See JohnCD's comment - the precedent seems pretty clear that even all of Nottingham Forest would not be notable enough to merit its own article. Perhaps "Memorial Area, Houston" would be encompassing enough to be notable.Mmyers1976 (talk) 14:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I did not do anything to disrupt wikipedia, nor did I attempt to do so in order to prove a point. I suggest you read WP:AGF. Also, bringing up already deleted comments of mine from my own User Page which I have changed my mind about (hence the deletion) in an attempt to discredit me is poor form. I respectfully but firmly request that you edit your above comment to make it more neutral, stick to the issue at hand, and leave personalities out of it.Mmyers1976 (talk) 15:32, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Categories: