Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanley Street, Liverpool
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 close) RMHED (talk) 17:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Stanley Street, Liverpool (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Duplication of existing article Liverpool gay quarter. Both Stanley St and gay quarter are notable for exactly the same reason. Michellecrisp (talk) 00:53, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In it's present form, I'd agree with you, but I'm pretty sure Stanley Street is famous for other reasons - there are strong Beatles connections with that street, for instance. As such, the articler can be expanded to a keepable state. Grutness...wha? 02:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Stanley Street, Liverpool, Google shows enough links to connect The Beatles per Grutness. Merge any usable content from Liverpool gay quarter into it.— Ѕandahl 02:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Grutness. Liverpool gay quarter may or may not need to live its own life, and if it doesn't need to, I'm not sure that the Stanley Street article is the right merge target. Liverpool#The_Gay_Quarter might be better, for example. --Tkynerd (talk) 03:59, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep & merge Liverpool#The_Gay_Quarter, make that a redirect (I speedied this originally as spam, but the list of is bars now deleted) jimfbleak (talk) 05:36, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- KeepThanks for all your comments. As I am new to wikipedia, it has been frustrating to hear that my first article is up for deletion on the first day. I understand that there are reasons. However, I hope this is the place where I can put my views forward. Stanley Street is an important street for Liverpool's gay community, just like Canal Street in Manchester. I was saddened to see that there was no mention of it already, hence the reason I wrote the article. It has also been in local newspapers quite a lot recently as we now have the prospect of a pedestrianised gay quarter. Whilst Stanley St is just one street, The Gay Quarter is several streets, and is an area encompassing all the gay venues, so I felt that there should be two separate articles - one for Stanley St - one for the Gay Quarter. I have attempted to change some of the text in both articles, so that they give different bits of information. If this is not enough, please let me know how I can improve each article (Richie wright1980 (talk) 06:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- Keep Just stumbled across this. It seems interesting, relevant and notable. A definite keeper.--seahamlass 20:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How long will it take for someone to decide if my articles will stay?, At the moment, if any visitors see the 'delete' tag all over the Stanley Street article, it doesn't look good. (Richie wright1980 (talk) 19:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- It usually takes 5 days. Some discussions are closed earlier if the result appears clear. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: And don't worry about it not looking good. Articles are tagged for all kinds of reasons all the time, it's just part of the Wikipedia experience and maintaining the integrity of the project. – ukexpat (talk) 21:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:55, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep Clearly notable in its own right. ukexpat (talk) 21:23, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I have expanded the Liverpool gay quarter article now, and worked on the Stanley Street, Liverpool article too, so hopefully they can both be retained now. (Richie wright1980 (talk) 18:32, 11 July 2008 (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.