Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Croxley Green Business Park


 * 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. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 01:37, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Croxley Green Business Park

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable business park (also totally unsourced, but that's not reason for deletion). Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  01:14, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Since when are Business Parks notable? Kevin Rutherford (talk) 15:06, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I say that an article with no sources needs one of two things, 1) sources or 2) deletion. It should take 30 seconds to decide which one best suits it. In this case, I go with 2) delete. Fails WP:NOTABLE and can't defend against that because it has no sources. How's that for efficient? User:Nezzadar (speak) 23:06, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Its assertion of notability is "Watford's largest business park"; I'd argue that in almost all cases the formula "(small town)'s largest (whatever)" does not establish notability. (See WP:MILL.) Further there are no reliable sources and unless there's some particular architectural or historic significance to the place any presumption of notability established by sources would be easily rebutted. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:15, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge into Croxley Green, then Delete. It is notable in the context of Croxley, but certainly not worthy of a stand alone article. WFCforLife (talk) 02:38, 13 October 2009 (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.