Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dyme, Greece

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 of the debate was keep. Punkmorten 21:15, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dyme, Greece

Delete- article is only one line long Vicarious 03:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - length is never a reason to delete. If you have a problem with it, expand it or put a tag on there. --HasNoClue 03:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
  • I strongly disagree that article length is not a reason to delete, however that is no longer relevant in this case because the article has been expanded. Vicarious 05:13, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
    • I agree, this would have been speedy material were it not a city. There should be a system where deletion worthy articles on topics that probably deserve an article are given priority cleanup. -- Kjkolb 13:57, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep geography/history stub Ruby 03:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep A real city is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Captain Jackson 04:22, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep - Per above. I've added {{Greece-stub}} to the article so the appropriate parties might clean it up. --lightdarkness ^(talk) 04:25, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't that be ancient Greece? Captain Jackson 05:12, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: no matter how short or awful an article about a city, university or high school is, it is extremely unlikely to be deleted. If it were about a different subject, it would have probably been speedily deleted. -- Kjkolb 05:24, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep geography is notbale.
• Keep. Article is now in reasonable shape and sourced. Notable historic place. Well done to those users who expanded the article.Capitalistroadster 05:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep. Article has the potential to expand. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 08:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Agree. The stuff I added was mostly just to start out and it's kind of a grab bag of stuff. I don't know enough to say much about the other additions.--T. Anthony 10:53, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• Keep will be expanded in time AwagMoordown 11:33, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, real location has notability.--Isotope23 17:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Real places are always notable. Carioca 20:20, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Pretty much what the above user said. --Every1blowz 20:21, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• As the deletion rationale no longer applies and all votes are keep, I'm going to call keep here. Punkmorten 21:15, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

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.