Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christ Church Lichfield

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 delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:26, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Christ Church Lichfield

Inisignificant, non notable. Also, bordering on advertisement. Steve 20:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. -- cds^(talk) 21:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Amazinglarry 22:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete without prejudice BigDT 22:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep, the building is over 150 years old, and it seems important for the community. Remove the time tables and give it some attention tag. -- ReyBrujo 00:03, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and expand based on the information on the historical and artistic associations of this church as discussed in the Lichfield article, which no one here seems to have read. --JJay 00:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: NN. 150 years old is not noteworthy for an English church, especially when it's in a hole-in-the-hedge like Lichfield. --die Baumfabrik 03:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Fledgeling 03:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Per die Baumfabrik -- I was thinking the same thing. — WCityMike ^(T | C)  ⇓ plz reply HERE  (why?) ⇓  18:03, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete The three-line summary on the Lichfield page is enough. ~ trialsanderrors 01:58, 5 June 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.