- 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 speedy keep. Nominator is urged to read, mark and learn from WP:BEFORE, WP:NPP and WP:CSD. JohnCD ( talk) 11:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Cornwall Park, Auckland
- Cornwall Park, Auckland ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- Article does not assert significance. Rollingcontributor ( talk) 19:29, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. Appears to be a substantial park, and I see no benefit from deletion here. -- Michig ( talk) 20:43, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
KeepArticle subjects aren't required to be "significant", so they certainly aren't required to assert it. They are required to be able to show notability, which they do with coverage in other sources. This does so: sources from 1901, sources from today. Andy Dingley ( talk) 20:53, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
- Emphasise this as a 'snow keep to a very dubious nomination (see below). Andy Dingley ( talk) 22:32, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. North America 1000 21:14, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
- Speedy keep Article clearly passes GNG. IMO an Afd within hours of creation is not constructive editing. DerbyCountyinNZ ( Talk Contribs) 22:02, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for spotting that, I'd also note that the nominator had earlier speedied it as WP:CSD#G1 " patent nonsense, consisting purely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history". Even for an editor with only a few hundred edits, this is far from the level of WP:COMPETENCE we require. This repeated deletion attempt was either less than competent, WP:POINTY or something deeper. Andy Dingley ( talk) 22:32, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
Could an uninvolved admin please close this AfD? The creation of this park is one of the most significant events in Auckland's history. I can't call myself uninvolved, as I have extensively edited related pages; otherwise, I would have closed the AfD myself. Schwede 66 07:54, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page. - Andy, I have marked it under G1, and immediately undid the action, as I felt it was not suitable. And perhaps I wasn't constructive by marking it for Afd very soon, but the G1 tag was removed immediately, in the next minute, as you can see in the edit log. Rollingcontributor ( talk) 10:55, 8 February 2016 (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.