Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caernarfon (HM Prison)


 * 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   merge to Caernarfon. Black Kite 00:33, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Caernarfon (HM Prison)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This prison was never built and is not going to be built. The land was not even purchased by the Prisons Service. Not notable. Bleaney (talk) 17:53, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:08, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * merge. Just because it isn't going to be built doesn't mean that it isn't notable. As there isn't much more that can be said (afaict) though, I think it would be better to merge this into a single article covering all the proposed sites (I haven't looked to see if we have any articles on these already) - if there were protests in Wrexham and Cwmbrân then there should be plenty of sources available. Thryduulf (talk) 21:53, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge As original creator of the page back when the Prison service "confirmed" that it was going to be built, looking at it now it should probably just be merged into the main Caernarfon page as a single paragraph under it's history section or similar. Miyagawa  (talk)  09:57, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * keep or merge. Good reference material. Jrcrin001 (talk) 00:37, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete There is already a paragraph in the Caernarfon article under Present day, and "Caernarfon (HM Prison)" as a search term, is meaningless. --Bejnar (talk) 06:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The title matches that of almost all the articles in the list at List of prisons in the United Kingdom - the only exception I think is Lancaster Castle, which is a special case and Lancaster Castle (HM Prison) exists as a redirect. This says to me that the title is a very useful search term, and the stats.grok.se figures show this title has had at between 40 and 200 hits a month since at least September, so at the very least the title should be kept as a redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 10:51, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * merge and redirect--Tmckeage (talk) 21:43, 8 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.