Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danvers Street

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 delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 03:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Danvers Street

Danvers Street (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Has been up for two years now with no sign of anyone expanding it beyond its three sentences. I'm unable to find anything of not ever having happened on this street, and IMO Alexander Fleming living there does not make it notable. As with everything else I'm dredging up whilst cleaning up Category:Streets in London, sending it to AfD instead of prodding as named geographic locations are always contentious — iridescent (talk to me!) 21:13, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete None of the references indicate notability. WP:OUTCOMES states that "minor streets are not generally notable." --Alksub 21:26, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete non-notable. MarkBul 21:37, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. No evidence of notability. Jakew 21:43, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as notability not inherited. --Gavin Collins 23:16, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Lack of Notability.--JForget 01:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete unless anyone can provide any evidence of notability. -- Roleplayer 00:42, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Question Iridescent, could you please give us some idea of where you have already looked so we don't duplicate. I would suggest that perhaps it might have been a better idea to do a smaller number at a time--I want to try to look for famous institutions and residences but I only have time to do one or two in the five days. And what if anything have the people !voting delete looked at? Frankly, I don't think this is a fair way to do it--its very strongly biased towards deletion with too little chance to improve them. DGG (talk) 03:27, 3 September 2007 (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.