Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brock Cemetery


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 03:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Brock Cemetery

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Not so much an article as a list of 2 famous dead people. No references provided to establish notability. Burpelson AFB (talk) 23:20, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:11, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, weakly. If it holds the gravesites are of notable people, as Annie Oakley surely is, it deserves a mention on their own pages.  A Books search reveals the existence of several Brock Cemeteries in several different states, but no in depth treatment of this one. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:36, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - The cemetery does get mentioned in relation to Oakley (see, and . But these are really mentions in articles about Annie Oakley.  I don't see this as sufficient to establish notability. -- Whpq (talk) 19:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak delete The 2 most famous inhabitants of the cemetery (and the ones which all references make mention of that I can find, other than general burial announcements of non-notable (from Wikipedia's point of view) people) are Annie Oakley and her husband. At best, this should be a redirect to the Annie Oakley article, but as other people are interred there, it may not be suitable for a redirect. The mention in the Oakley article is sufficient in itself, in my opinion - an article is not justified, unless significant coverage of the cemetery can be found (although I was not able to find such coverage) - and I can find practically no coverage of Douglas E. Dickey in relation to the cemetery. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 19:33, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete sadly. I am not against pages that have limited info on them, especially if more can be added to in the future. But I don't see how this will happen for this page. If it stays it should get an "orphan tag" since it will only link to OA or DD's pages. MarnetteD | Talk 01:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete with this little info, it can be easily recreated if sources to establish notability can be found. Dew Kane (talk) 04:12, 2 April 2010 (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.