Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anse Chastanet

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 Redirect to Soufrière, Saint Lucia#Local attractions. The page history will be available for the selective merge and can be completed from there. (non-admin closure). TonyBallioni (talk) 00:52, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anse Chastanet

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Advertising for a resort. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎Pbsouthwood (talk • contribs) 15:51, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion was not listed in any daily log. I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 November 1. • Gene93k (talk) 14:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:09, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:09, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:09, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:09, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, but wildly rewrite. The main subject of the entry is the beach itself, which merits an entry. There are earlier non-spammy versions to revert to. Hairhorn (talk) 16:39, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Selective merge to Soufrière, Saint Lucia#Local attractions - There's maybe two sentences of RS-sourced, encyclopedic content here, and maintaining even a stub would more likely invite promo rather than encyclopedic expansion. Google turns up mountains of travel-blog fluff or mere passing mentions. It may be possible to build a decent article about the beach if someone has access to more sober offline sources, but everything that's worth keeping from the current offering could happily live at the town's article. Antepenultimate (talk) 23:22, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I would support the selective merge proposal, with redirect. That is most likely to prevent a recurrence. • • • Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 07:11, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:56, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is quite possible that very little further comment will be added as this is a marginally notable topic. If nothing more comes up, the merge and redirect should satisfy most concerns. It will eliminate the spam, conserve what little is worth conserving, and reduce the risk of future spamming. If the section ever gets expanded to the point where it justifies a separate article, it can be split back. • • • Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 05:16, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I made the sole keep vote above and the merge proposal sounds fine to me. Hairhorn (talk) 21:30, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Soufrière, Saint Lucia#Local attractions as suggested; anything useful can be picked up from the article history. K.e.coffman (talk) 08:22, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.