Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashley House

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 11:04, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ashley House

Who wants to know about an obscure house in Bermuda? Delete. TAS 17:18, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I don't see any reason why not to include the bramuda house as long as the content is accurate. It seems to be a valid referance to a historic building in the "New World" where you may notice we have a shortage of realy old buildings. Honestly i think that there is no reason to delete the page unless it can be proven inacurate.

Unsigned comment by 168.99.197.187 (talk · contributions)

One reason is that Wikipedia is not a general knowledge base. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:30, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Keep and Cleanup. I agree that this should be placed somewhere on the Bermuda pages, but I am thinking it could be cleaned up a bit so it does not sound like an ad. Zscout370 17:33, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. It's one of 60 historical properties on the island. What's so special about this one? Gamaliel 20:20, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: That just gave me an idea, why not create a page of Historical Places in Bermuda. Zscout370 21:08, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep --SPUI (talk) 20:57, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep There are many such articles in Wikipedia, and we shouldn't sneer at small countries. Wincoote 01:22, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Comment I would be much, much, much happier seeing this as a section in an article on Historical Places in Bermuda than as a separate article in itself. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:30, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Agree with Dpbsmith. Move to Historical Places in Bermuda, then tag for expansion. Meelar (talk) 01:57, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, nothing really outstanding or notable about this structure. Megan1967 03:02, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep historical properties. If it's moved I'd prefer Historical places in Bermuda or Historical buildings in Bermuda. You know, capitalization and all that ;) Mgm|^(talk) 08:17, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as nn. Radiant_* 10:50, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep historic places. Kappa 11:41, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Other historic houses should all be kept, why shouldn't this one? P Ingerson
• Oh no! Ashley-cruft strikes again! keep Grue 14:53, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Per Gamaliel's comment -- answer: It's important enough. The non-notable argument is the most misused one out there. This is for architectural record and probably useful for a number of people. Sniffandgrowl 01:06, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • User was created today; he has only two edits not to vfds, one of them to his user page. —Korath (Talk) 02:26, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep all important historic buildings.--Centauri 02:24, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Well, sure, but is this an important building? That's the whole question, isn't it? Dpbsmith (talk) 02:35, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • It says "A Grade One listing is applied to properties that are of significant historic and/or architectural importance to the country" Kappa
• As I undersatand it, a "Grade One listed" building is by definition a significant structure. Keep Dsmdgold 22:52, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.