Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of cremation in Singapore
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Shereth (talk | contribs) at 20:23, 24 April 2007 (→[[History of cremation in Singapore]]: non admin close as keep). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
- 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 this content. Whether it should be merged or moved or just stay where it is at is an editorial decision and no consensus to merge/move was reached on this discussion. Arkyan • (talk) 20:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- History of cremation in Singapore (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
This article covers a topic which is too narrow in scope. It is the work of a the NUS Scholars Programme, and while more than adequately referenced (actually a very good example of proper referencing), it still is a subject that is too esoteric and not notable enough to merit its own article. It reads more like a research paper, which is likely what it is. Realkyhick 20:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Incomplete AfD by User:Realkyhick completed by Anthony Appleyard for the sake of tidyness at 20:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC). This missing AfD file was not in the deletion log.[reply]
- Sorry, system crashed in the process. My bad. Realkyhick 20:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - space is at a premium in Singapore, so cremation as means for dealing with those who have passed away is significant. The article is well referenced, and well written. It may need a bit of copyeditting to make read less like a school research project, but that isn't a reason for deletion. -- Whpq 21:04, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Given that most of these young people's articles will be deleted, I am inclined to allow this one. The scope is very narrow, but Wikipedia is not paper and it seems a valid hictorical subject. "Space is at a premium" - mention that in the article! -- RHaworth 21:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mergeinto death in Singapore. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-19 21:25Z- Change to keep as sub-article to prevent seriously over-balancing the parent article. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-21 02:36Z
- Comment: Didn't even know there was a death in Singapore article. I could easily see this article merged into that one, though it would probably have to be shortened. Realkyhick 22:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge into "Death in Singapore". That's clearly the best solution. Cheers, Jacklee 03:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above, though I feel bad for the person who attempts this. I'll try to help. nadav 03:40, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]- Keep On second thought, there is nothing wrong with making this a subarticle of Death in Singapore. Wikipedia is not paper, and there is a lot of new material here. It is one of the only acceptable USP articles, though it does need cleanup. nadav 03:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep,
Move to Cremation in Singapore. Notable topic. It doesn't fit well into Death in Singapore which should focus on demographics and causes of death.--Vsion 06:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]- Well half of the article says you're wrong. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-20 10:22Z
- That's what's wrong with the article. --Vsion 03:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That's what's wrong with your understanding of what the article is supposed to have. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-24 03:59Z
- That's what's wrong with the article. --Vsion 03:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename to Death customs in Singapore and expand scope to include burial. Identify differences in funeral customs among different ethnicity: chinese funeral wakes, muslim burial customs, etc. --Vsion 03:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Well what's wrong with putting that in death in Singapore? The article doesn't have anything on those and you're already proposing to split things up with no overview. Some sort of summary style revolution, huh. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-24 03:59Z
- Well half of the article says you're wrong. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-20 10:22Z
- 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.