Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ludwigite

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The result of the debate was Nomination withdrawn - Werdna648^T/_C\^@ 09:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ludwigite

The entire text reads "Ludwigite is a mineral." It's been around since June 2005 with no expansion. Durova 12:09, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep - I've added a bit about it. But it doesn't seem a terribly notable mineral. Tearlach 13:59, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. According to the main Mineral article, there are "just over 4,000 known minerals". I don't see any reason not to have articles on all of them, if people want to write them. u p p l a n d 14:39, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above arguments. Punkmorten 19:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I agree with Uppland. --Thunk 22:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
• Very weak withdrawn nomination. At least this is no longer completely devoid of content. It's moved up to a one sentence substub. Durova 22:36, 9 January 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.