Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ebenezer Place, Wick


 * 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   Keep, also note that AFD created by banned user. NawlinWiki (talk) 16:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Ebenezer Place, Wick

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Merge or delete per below. Oxicleanfanatic (talk) 15:31, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to the Wick, Highland article. This should not be a standalone article or just deleted. Why? Because there's nothing to expand on and nothing more to say about it that isn't said in the Wick, Highland article. All it really is, is a door that's an entrance to a hotel restaurant. Not worthy of its own article.--Oxicleanfanatic (talk) 15:31, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 16:33, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 16:33, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - Easily meets WP:GNG through plenty of secondary, reliable sources, including the BBC. Will work on expanding the article. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 16:35, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Added a couple references and a bit of info, but there's not much more info to expand it with. Nonetheless I still believe it's deserving of its own article. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 16:57, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Not sure if there's anything that can be said about this other than what's in the stub. Nevertheless, the holder of on officially-recognised record is easily notable. Keep if anyone can manage to make a full article out of this, Merge and Redirect if not. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 16:44, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - plenty of sources. What it needs now is for someone local (a "wick"-ipedian?) to take and upload a photo. - Pointillist (talk) 17:24, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I put in a request for the creator of this photo over at Flickr to release it under a Creative Commons license, so we'll see what happens. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * A "Wickipedia"... As I live in Wick I shall take a picture of it in the next few days - when the perpetual rain decides to stop for a minute. Alan16 (talk) 23:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep: per Juliancolton. Joe Chill (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Plenty of sources, and a record-holding street is notable. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 17:36, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep -- It is certainly notable as the shortest street. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:49, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * But what is wrong with merge/redirecting?--Oxicleanfanatic (talk) 19:13, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't imagine anyone would have objected if you had quietly merged the content into Wick and left a redirect behind, but since this has come up at AfD other editors have become interested in it. It is unique, of course, but there's also something delightfully improbable about the image of a Highlands official stubbornly demanding that this 6 foot stretch be treated as a distinct street. If the article stays separate there's more chance of attracting pictures and expanded content, and there's no slight to you intended by our "keep" !votes—this is rather a special case. - Pointillist (talk) 21:44, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - It is unique. Deserves an article for the same reasons Bao Xishun and similar type people do. Alan16 (talk) 23:28, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep this is one sort of information people tend to look for in an encyclopedia, and expect  it to be there. It is therefore encyclopedic. DGG (talk) 23:44, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note nominator has been blocked indefinitely for vandalism (see User talk:Oxicleanfanatic). - Pointillist (talk) 14:02, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This could probably be speedily closed as a bad-faith nomination in that case. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 15:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Doesn't feel like bad faith, though, despite other activities of the nom. SNOW would justify closure anyway, especially now Alan16 has promised a photo. - Pointillist (talk) 15:45, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd agree closing it because of SNOW. Looks like it should be dry tomorrow, so assuming the weather forecast is accurate I shall get a picture. Alan16 (talk) 16:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep seems notable and souced. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:27, 20 July 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.