Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Century Garden

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 no consensus; thus, the article is kept. —Korath (Talk) 01:25, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Century Garden

Article on a housing development.Ganymead 04:41, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, not notable, cruft. Megan1967 06:25, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep A perfectly respectable entry. Wincoote 18:33, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, as mentioned above, it's just not notable. Sonzai 01:03, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• The neighborhood should be listed under the main city article. The 'notable' neighborhood watch and housing development co should be deleted imho. Radiant_* 09:36, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, neighbourhoods have long been encyclopedic. - SimonP 12:15, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Seems perfectly notable to me.--Gene_poole 02:37, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I sympathize with Ganymead and Radiant and would prefer to vote delete on articles like this. But, unnfortunately, the precedent has been established that place-names are all encyclopedia topics. Rambot added tens of thousands of stubs for American place-names automatically. I think this was done without sufficient forethought, and might well be reconsidered, but consistency demands that it not be done on an article-by-article basis. As I understand it, this is "new town" in JB, not just a housing complex. --BM 13:14, 26 Mar 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.