This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 9, 2010
Transport in Round Maple
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Delete There is no transport in Round Maple. Round Maple (pop. 20) is a loose collection of half a dozen or so dwellings on a country lane. Any "information" there is in the article is
WP:OR based on the editors interpretation of an A-Z map.
Nancy talk17:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
If the outcome of this discussion is delete then I would also suggest deleting
Transport for Round Maple at the same time. The trouble with these is that they play havoc with the suggestion drop downs for people searching for legitimate transport topics. In my opinion this actually does make their presence harmful (in the sense of detrimental) to the project.
Nancy talk18:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Bull's Cross Wood
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Keep - the fact that this feature is non-notable is the reason why this is a redirect and not an article. Redirects to features mentioned in locality articles are entirely normal. Also, the nomination does not contain any policy-based reason for deletion. Entirely harmless.
Bridgeplayer (
talk)
18:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete. There might be somewhere that this wood could be discussed, but
Round Maple is not it. The place is a tiny hamlet of two or three houses, is not a parish, and in my looking the woods are never referred to as 'part of' the hamlet. What is interesting about these woods is that they are part of the Milden Thicks SSSI
[1]. If an article was created on the SSSI (or the SSSI was part of another article) then this would be a useful redirect. As it stands however, it is simply a confusing redirect of a small piece of woodland to a tiny hamlet nearby.
Quantpole (
talk)
11:12, 10 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete per Quantpole's well stated argument. Also noting that the editor seems intent on creating a redirect to Round Maple (pop. 20) for every single word he finds in its vicinity on the A-Z & OS maps. This is not helpful or useful.
Nancy talk17:43, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Bulls Cross Wood
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Keep - the fact that this feature is non-notable is the reason why this is a redirect and not an article. Redirects to features mentioned in locality articles are entirely normal. Also, the nomination does not contain any policy-based reason for deletion. Entirely harmless.
Bridgeplayer (
talk)
18:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete was always a redirect, never had content, recently created. The article only mentions a similar name, not this one, and only in passing, without any actual information about this or the related similarly named topic.
184.144.167.193 (
talk)
05:29, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete Editor seems intent on creating a redirect to Round Maple (pop. 20) for every single word he finds in its vicinity on the A-Z & OS maps. This is not helpful or useful.
Nancy talk17:41, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Round Maple Cottage
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Keep - the fact that this building is non-notable is the reason why this is a redirect and not an article. Redirects to buildings mentioned in locality articles are entirely normal. Also, the nomination does not contain any policy-based reason for deletion. Entirely harmless.
Bridgeplayer (
talk)
18:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep as stated above, the fact that the building is non notable, is why it is redirected to
Round Maple, and not a separate article (it is mentioned in
Round Maple anyway). It isn't doing any harm anyway and probably will be searched sometimes. It is appropriate to mention non-notable buildings in an article about a small hamlet, if it was in an article like
London, then it wouldn't be appropriate to mention it, but in a small hamlet it is certainly worth mentioning.
Crouch, Swaletalk to meMy contribs14:59, 10 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete This is not a listed building it is just a random house in the tiny (pop. 20) hamlet of
Round Maple. It appears that equally pointless redirects have been created for each of the other houses therein. This has to stop.
Nancy talk17:36, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Well House
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Deleted. A well house is also be a structure containing a
water well. There are a number of mentions of such well houses in articles. None of them are significant so disambiguation really isn't suitable. This is a case where relying the search tool is the best solution for our readers. --
JLaTondre (
talk)
15:54, 18 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep - the fact that this building is non-notable is the reason why this is a redirect and not an article. Redirects to buildings mentioned in locality articles are entirely normal. Also, the nomination does not contain any policy-based reason for deletion. Entirely harmless.
Bridgeplayer (
talk)
18:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete. Many other buildings (and other entities such as businesses) called 'Well House' most of which are probably more notable than this. (Also confusing with the Wells House dab page as noted above).
Quantpole (
talk)
11:16, 10 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete exceedingly generic term. It was always a redirect, never had content, recently created. This is only mentioned in passing in the article, without any detail on the topic. There are many "well house"s in the world, what makes the one in Round Maple the primary usage of this term? Google says
[2] there are many other much more prominent locations, such as the one in Cornwall, also in the UK.
184.144.167.193 (
talk)
05:31, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Wells House This is not a listed building it is just a random house in the tiny (pop. 20) hamlet of
Round Maple. It appears that equally pointless redirects have been created for each of the other houses therein. This has to stop.
Nancy talk17:36, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Langley View
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Keep - the fact that this building is non-notable is the reason why this is a redirect and not an article. Redirects to buildings mentioned in locality articles are entirely normal. Also, the nomination does not contain any policy-based reason for deletion. Entirely harmless.
Bridgeplayer (
talk)
Keep as stated above, the fact that the building is non notable, is why it is redirected to
Round Maple, and not a separate article (it is mentioned in
Round Maple anyway). It isn't doing any harm anyway and probably will be searched sometimes (I can't see why it's pointless). Also
Round Maple is a small hamlet, so it is appropriate to mention it.
Crouch, Swaletalk to meMy contribs14:53, 10 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete was always a redirect, never had content, recently created. This is only mentioned in passing in the article, without any detail on the topic. A simple Google search also shows this is not even the most likely target for this
[3] ... the one in DEVON is first hit.
184.144.167.193 (
talk)
05:39, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete This is not a listed building it is just a random house in the tiny (pop. 20) hamlet of
Round Maple. It appears that equally pointless redirects have been created for each of the other houses therein. This has to stop.
Nancy talk17:35, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Round Maple Cottages
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Keep - the fact that this building is non-notable is the reason why this is a redirect and not an article. Redirects to buildings mentioned in locality articles are entirely normal. Also, the nomination does not contain any policy-based reason for deletion. Entirely harmless.
Bridgeplayer (
talk)
Delete was always a redirect, never had content, recently created. A similarly named topic is only mentioned in passing in the article, without any detail on the topic, and it is singular, not plural.
184.144.167.193 (
talk)
05:33, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete This is not a listed building it is just a random row of houses in the tiny (pop. 20) hamlet of
Round Maple. It appears that equally pointless redirects have been created for each of the other houses therein. This has to stop.
Nancy talk17:34, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Hatherway Cottage
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Keep - the fact that this building is non-notable is the reason why this is a redirect and not an article. Redirects to buildings mentioned in locality articles are entirely normal. Also, the nomination does not contain any policy-based reason for deletion. Entirely harmless.
Bridgeplayer (
talk)
18:18, 9 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete. Confusing because Hatherway is a very plausible misspelling of Hathaway and there are a couple of
otherarticles, one of which is very well known. This is simply a grade 2 listed house, of which there are ~340,000. The potential mess from creating redirects for all of those properties is very large.
Quantpole (
talk)
10:51, 10 December 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete was always a redirect, never had content, recently created. This is only mentioned in passing in the article, without any detail on the topic. The article clearly separates this from the Grade-2 houses mentioned in the article, so this does not even appear to be a grade-2 house.
184.144.167.193 (
talk)
05:36, 11 December 2010 (UTC)reply
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Ring a Ding Ding
The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.