Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eastern Hill Fire Station: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:10, 1 January 2006

Eastern Hill Fire Station

Wait wait... don't tell me! Fire stations getting articles now? Stop the madness. Yeah, it's... you guessed it... Firecruft. FCYTravis 09:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Longhair 10:18, 1 January 2006 (UTC) [reply]

weak keep from the article contents this building also has a mueseum in it. Sounds notable enough then. novacatz 10:10, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The museum mentioned in the article could be notable, but that would involve writing a completely new article at a new title. Ambi 10:11, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If someone wants to write an article on the museum, I have no objection - fire museums are probably notable. But a fire station that happens to have a museum next door... isn't. This is how precedents get set, and I really don't think Wikipedia needs articles on every fire station in the world. FCYTravis 10:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article about the fact that the building's historic, not that it's a fire station, per se. Historic buildings are encyclopedic, plain ol' fire stations are not. So I can't see how it's setting a precedence. Cnwb 13:15, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I think. This is one of the earliest and most important Fire Stations in Australia - certainly in Victoria. Bduke 10:21, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- FYI, this station is listed on the Victorian Heritage Register. No vote. -- Longhair 10:29, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kinda keep. We give train station pages, don't we? -- Eddie 10:49, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, linked from Heritage listed buildings in Melbourne--SarekOfVulcan 11:08, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So does this set a precedent for a separate article on every single one of the 79,000 places and 1.2 million buildings listed on the National Register of Historic Places, the 1,100 California State Historic Landmark plaques, etc.? FCYTravis 11:17, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not an average fire station. CalJW 11:49, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all fire station/high school/etc articles. Now. :) --Tothebarricades 12:03, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Aaargh, one of my articles on AfD! It's a grand old historic building in Melbourne. I'm planning to include photos of it soon. And it's not "firecruft" - it's local history. It's notable enough for the Enclyclopedia of Melbourne [1]. Cnwb 12:56, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This building is listed as a historic place and is important to the history of the area that it is in. Keep and expand. Movementarian 14:37, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per cnwb, and someone who knows about it can rewrite to explain its notability better. pfctdayelise 14:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for hisotrical signficance. --Rob 15:10, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 *'''Keep'''.  This building is listed as a historic place and is important to the history of the area that it is in.  Keep and expand.  [[User:Movementarian|Movementarian]] 14:37, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * '''Keep''' per [[User|cnwb]], and someone who knows about it can rewrite to explain its notability better.  [[User:Pfctdayelise|pfctdayelise]] 14:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
+* '''Keep''' for hisotrical signficance.  --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 15:10, 1 January 2006 (UTC)